EFTA01189460.pdf

From: Gregory Brown To: undisclosed-recipients:; Bcc: jeevacation@gmail.com Subject: Greg Brown's Weekend Reading and Other Things.... 10/20/2013 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 14:55:15 +0000 Attachments: Debt- ceiling_breach_would_push_economy_into_fite_fall,without_a_govemment_safety_net_T WP_October 14,2013.docx; The Heartache_of an Immigrant Family_Sonia_Nazorio_NYT_October_14,2013.docx; How the_shutiown derailed the —Republican_rebranding_campaign_Scott_Clement_&_Se an Salivan TWP ectober_15„1013.docx; How the_GbP SliTmly_Wentinsane_Jon_Lovett_The_Atlantic_October_16„2013.docx; 15 Reasons_Why_American Politics_Has_Become_An_Apocalyptic_Mess_Howard_Fine man Huff ost I ) 16 20137docx; Viewmg_U.S._m_Fear_and_Dismay_Damien_Cave_NYT_October_16,2013.docx; Fast- Food_Wages_Come_With_a_$7_Billion_Side_of_Public_Assistance_BLOOMBERG_BUSI NESSWEEK_10_16_2013.docx; Republicanslhollow_defeat_Eugene_Robinson_TWP_October_17,_2013.docx; Transcript,President_Obama's_Oct._17_remar_=?WINDOWS-1252?Q? ks_on_the_budget_deal=5FOctober_17,_2013.docx?=; U2_bio.docx Inline-Images: image.png; image(1).png; image(2).png; image(3).png; image(4).png; image(5).png; image(6).png; image(7).png; image(8).png; image(9).png; image(10).png; image(11).png; image(12).png; image(I3).png; image(14).png; image(I5).png; image(16).png; image(17).png; image(I8).png; image(19).png DEAR FRIEND It was interesting watching the Sunday morning network news programs last weekend. Watching in amazement how Republicans and the media has shaped-shifted both history and facts. First of all, if my memory serves me correctly the initial issue that Congressional Republicans claimed would destroy the American economy is Obamacare, and that unless President Obama and the Democrats either defund or delay its implementation they would force a government shutdown. And they did. Then when they realized that they could not rollover the President forcing him to accept their terms (because theyfelt that they had been successful in bullying him in 2011) and universally it was realize byall that their actions were both extremely stupid and worse, dangerous — they then tried to re- frame the shutdown as the President, Harry Reid and the Democrats refusing to compromise. What truly outraged me were the Sunday pundits, suggesting that maybe the President and the Democrats give an olive branch, allowing Republican House Speaker John Boehner to save face and lay claim that their actions were somehow valid. The difficulty with the Republican's position was that the longer that the shutdown continued, American voters, the business and international communities and the press beginning to openly criticize the Tea Party and other Republican leaders who force this ridiculously and idiotic flawed strategy. By Monday with the possible default on government obligations just three days away Republicans claimed that Senate Democratic leaders — believing they had a political advantage in the continuing fiscal impasse — refused last Sunday to sign on to any deal that would have reopen the government and locked in budget cuts for next year. The problem with that bogus assertion is that even if that kind of deal was on the table, the Republican leadership in the house were afraid to bring it EFTA01189460 to a floor vote because of their fears of alienating their colleagues in the hard right. But then how did we go from defunding the Affordable Healthcare Act to 'out-of-control Democratic spending,' as the central issue perpetuating the shutdown? People forget that it was Reaganites in the 198os who first claimed that "deficits doesn't matter"during the 198os, as a way to get their treasured 'Reagan tax cuts' passed. Web Link: minutes/2013/09/25/4a9cbcb4-2570-11e3-b3e9-d97fb087acd6_video.html Since 1980, the debt ceiling has been raised 42 times. It was raised 17 times under Ronald Reagan, four times under Bill Clinton and seven times under George W. Bush. Congress is currently in a contentious debate with the White House on whether to raise the ceiling again by mid-October, which would be the sixth increase under Barack Obama. In the graph below the bars indicate the debt each year. In The public debt trillions subject to the debt limit was 516.68 S16 trillion as of Aug. 31. S14 S12 S10 Party In control ■ Democrats S8 ■ Republicans Debt ceiling S6 S4 S2 SO House INNaMMA= Ser ate SOURCES: Congressional Budget Office, U.S. Treasury. Look at the above graph. During the twelve years of Reagan and Bush Administrations, the deficit was more than tripled. And then under the eight years that the Bush/Cheney Administration was in office, the deficit more than doubled. Now I ask you, where were these same 'deficit hawks' during the Reagan and Bush Administrations? And although under President Obama the national deficit has EFTA01189461 grown from approximately $11 trillion to almost $16.7 trillion, Republicans chose to ignore that on January 20, 2009 the country's economy was in total chaos, with the financial markets in a total meltdown, a monthly loss of more than 750,000 jobs, housing prices in a free-fall, the country in two wars without a strategy or end and the country's prestige at an all-time low. And like FDR did with the Great Depression, President Obama (and Bush with TARP) chose to flood the economy with money to reverse the economic catastrophe he inherited. I watched the Sunday morning news programs and the only thing that I heard Republicans talk about was cutting spending. I am not opposed to cutting spending when it is cutting waste. But I have to ask why these same Republicans never mention raising revenues. Cutting overhead is a good way to provide stability when there is lots of waste, but without generating revenues it is almost impossible for a household, company or country to grow. We already know that supply-side economics don't work. Let's be honest, wealth doesn't really trickle down to the masses if the rich can help it. Because if that were true, 97% of the wealth generated since 2009 would not have only gone to the top 10%, creating greater inequality and further squeezing our Middle Class. The current shutdown and deficit crisis are phony shams and to dignify them with an olive branch compromise would be a travesty. This was written on Monday so that I could chronicle how the rest of the week played out. Chief White House Correspondent for NBC News, as well as the host of The Daily Rundown on MSNBC, Chuck Todd excoriated Ted Cruz on Monday's "Morning Joe" after the senator questioned the accuracy of a recent NBC News poll about the government shutdown. The survey, which NBC pollsters said they were "shocked" by, showed Republicans with their worst ratings in the poll's history, and blamed the GOP for the shutdown. "Morning Joe" played footage of Cruz saying that the poll was "heavily weighted" with an "awful lot" of Democrats. Web link: Todd didn't mince words in his response, saying that a Republican "echo chamber" was distorting thinking. "The problem is two-thirds of the country is thinking something else," he said. "And that's what you see in our poll. It wasn't just Democrats, it was independents and it was the one half EFTA01189462 of the Republican Party that doesn't associate itself with the Tea Party wing of the party." He called recent appearance with Sarah Palin "odd," adding, "What planet are you living on here?!" Employing the logic of television's every-man, Ralph ICramden from The Honeymooners The answer would be, "Pluto," which I can assure you is not a term of endearment or a description of wisdom. Last month I had the privilege of watching LATINO AMERICANS - a landmark three-part, six- hour documentary series that aired nationally on PBS in September. It is the first major documentary series for PBS television that chronicles the rich and varied history and experiences of Latinos, who have helped shape North America over the last 500-plus years and have become, with more than 5o million people, the largest minority group in the U.S. This changing and yet repeating context of American history provides a backdrop for the drama of individual lives. It is a story of immigration and redemption, of anguish and celebration, of the gradual construction of a new American identity that connects and empowers millions of people today. As immigration is at the heart of the American experience, and a central part of the long-running democratic experiment that is the United States. So is this PBS series which intersects much that is central to the history of the United States. The story includes expansionism, Manifest Destiny, the Wild West, multiple wars (Mexican-American, Spanish-American, World War II), the rise of organized labor, the Great Depression, the post WWII boom, the Cold War, the Civil Rights movement, globalization, and the effects of multiple kinds of technologies — from the railroad and barbed wire to the internet and satellite television. Despite such familiar landmarks, our history will go to places where standard U.S. histories do not tend to tread. The series is also driven by the human dramas of our characters' struggles and triumphs, successes and disappointments, both historical personages and living ones. They are people whose stories tell us much about their times. g2i The films chronicles Latinos in the United States from the sixteenth century to present day. It is a story of people, politics, and culture, large in scale and deep in its reach. The changing and yet repeating context of American history provides a backdrop for the drama of individual lives. It is a story of immigration and redemption, of anguish and celebration, of the gradual construction of a new American identity that connects and empowers millions of people today. LATINO AMERICANS features interviews with an array of individuals, including entertainer Rita Moreno, the Puerto Rican star of West Side Story and a winner of Academy, Tony, Grammy and Emmy Awards; labor leader and 2012 Presidential Medal of Freedom recipient Dolores Huerta, who in the 196os co-founded with Cesar Chavez the National Farm Workers Association, which later became United Farm Workers of America; Mexican-American author and commentator Linda Chavez, who became the highest-ranking EFTA01189463 woman in the Reagan White House; and Cuban singer and entrepreneur Gloria Estefan, who has sold more than 100 million solo and Miami Sound Machine albums globally. I invite everyone to take the time to watch the LATINO AMERICANS videos at the web link below. Web Link: http://www.pbs.orgfiatino-americansien/watch-videos/#23_65Q7529_6 The aim of this new PBS documentary on Latinos in the United States becomes clear in the first moments of the broadcast: "What is our history?" asks a man with the weary smile of one who has posed such questions before. "What is the claim that we have to being members of this society?" Though the film stresses the unique impact of Hispanics in the United States, it does not portray a people set apart. "LATINO AMERICANS" is as relentlessly assimilationist in its viewpoint as it is unfailingly sympathetic to its subject. It takes its viewers from 1565 — when Spain created Florida's San Agustin, the first European settlement in what would become the United States — to the 21st century, with Dreamers marching and Minutemen on patrol, the filmmakers deploy still images, recovered diaries, press reports, artwork, video re-enactments and insights from historians, journalists and activists. They also mix in interviews with legendary Latino cultural figures including Rita Moreno, Gloria Estefan and Julia Alvarez. Although it is culturally safe for crossover appeal — the qualities of this series is a wonderful, if not an elegant journey of the history of Latinos in America. Again.... I urge everyone to try to see the series as it will broaden your view of the American Experience and the contributions and tribulations that Latinos paid as part of their journey. As Scott Clement and Sean Sullivan wrote this week in The Washington Post in an article - How the shutdown derailed the Republican rebranding campaign - Nearly a year removed from a presidential election that put its electoral and demographic weaknesses on full display, the Republican Party has been badly hampered by the ongoing government shutdown as it tries to rebrand itself in advance of both the 2014 midterms and the 2016 presidential election, according to an analysis of three weeks' worth of Washington Post-ABC News polling data. In choosing to take the hard-line stance favored by its most conservative wing, Republican leaders in Congress have not only alienated electorally critical independents and other key demographic groups that their 2012 presidential nominee won but also further revealed the deep schism within their own party. The Washington Post POLL ABC News Q: Do you approve or disapprove of the way... is/are handling negotiations over the federal budget? Barack Obama Democrats in Congress Republicans in Congress APPROVE DISAPPROVE APPROVE DISAPPROVE APPROVE DISAPPROVE Oct. 2-6 45% 51% i IL 35% 61% 24% 70% Sept. 25-29 41% 50% E 34% 56% L2696 63% Source This Washington Postage News poll was conducted by telephone Oct. 24. 2013. among a random sample of 1.005 adults. Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish on landlines and cellcnories. The results have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points. Sampling, data collection and tabulation by SSRS of Media, Pa. Start with political independents who supported Mitt Romney over Obama by five points nearly one year ago. Now 76 percent disapprove of Republicans' budget wrangling, slightly more than the 68 percent who disapprove of Democrats. Among white voters, the story is similar. Romney won whites by 20 points in 2012, but 74 percent of whites in the Post-ABC poll disapprove of Republicans' EFTA01189464 handling of budget negotiations. And while Romney won 56 percent of voters ages 65 and older, a much larger 73 percent of seniors disapprove of Republicans on the budget. See Web Link: http://wapo.st/19BLCkA Then there are the problems within the GOP that the shutdown strategy has revealed. Nearly half (47 percent) of Republicans disapprove of the the way GOP has handled budget talks, a remarkable level of discord across the country that mirrors infighting in Washington. Look deeper into the numbers and the divides become even clearer. More than six in 10 Republicans who call themselves "very conservative" approve of their party's handling of the budget negotiations, according to combined Post-ABC po11s over the past two weeks. Approval drops sharply to 48 percent among those who are only "somewhat conservative" and again to 42 percent among those who are moderate or liberal. By focusing so heavily on tying the delay or defunding of Obamacare to the government shutdown — an unpopular position, according to polls — Republicans in Washington played to the wishes of their base. But, as the 2012 election showed, the Republican base is not what it once was, and to win the White House in three years' time the party needs to find a way to broaden its appeal. The shutdown is a clear setback in those efforts at a time when the GOP can ill afford it. It's very important to clearly understand that the Republican Party's right wing, supported by moderates, offered no serious deal to him by proposing a postponement of their threat to let the U.S. default. They pointed a gun at his head and then said they may not pull the trigger for another six weeks. That is still extortion of the worst kind. Obama is simply saying, "Put the gun down and I will negotiate." For example, The Wall Street Journal's front page this week said point blank that Obama turned down the Republicans' offer to negotiate without mentioning that they did not withdraw their threat to do this all over again, which is the obstacle in the first place. The Right Wing of the House Republicans are united against any compromise to re-open the federal government and raise the deficit that doesn't send a message if not to delay and destroy the Affordable Health Care Act — Obamacare. So why is there still a segment of the public still being seduced by this Republican fringe? Why is this small group of Republicans so profoundly disturbed by Obamacare? Here's where a bit of history hurts. We remember that universal health care failed to get passed under FDR, who wanted such a system. It made perfectly good sense to him. The American Medical Association, the doctors' organization, pushed hard against it, and the phrase "socialized medicine" in a time of rising anti-communism struck a chord among the people. FDR lost the battle. We assume those same sentiments are still at work. Now, of course, big pharma and insurance companies are often the opposition to single-payer. And no doubt there is still a lot of nonsense about not letting Uncle Sam into our medical offices or creating requirements to buy insurance. In the case of Obamacare, we have to stop fooling ourselves. The source of opposition is as simple as intense racial prejudice and anti-abortion attitudes. Remember, Obamacare will radically expand Medicaid, a service for the poor. In the South, that mostly means black people. And many southern governors, even though it would cost them almost nothing because the federal government would pick up go percent of the cost, are not implementing the plan. These same Republicans are demanding a "conscience" clause that would allow individual corporations to refuse abortion financing. The Washington Post reported that in a closed-door session, Paul Ryan said Republicans can't accept an extension of the deadline because they need it as "leverage" for demanding the conscience clause. Destroying Obamacare is the number one scalp on the Republican agenda. The phony faux Republican argument about reducing the deficit is on the back burner because facts show supported by the Financial Times this week, show that the 10-year deficit is now a non-issue. More important, FT says that the long-term deficit is also a non-issue. And by their calculation, we only have to grow by 0.2 percent more a year to keep it manageable, even as Medicare and Medicaid costs rise rapidly. EFTA01189465 Republicans have to shift back to reality. Because the truth is that growth is what matters, to which the Republican respond that they want more government cuts. The Senate Democrats won't agree to retain the sequester and thereby do a deal with the Senate Republicans, but Mitch McConnell boasts how much it has cut government spending. He left out the part about how it is seriously impeding America's economic growth at the same time. Think about it: Without the sequester; the U.S. would very likely be growing at a healthy pace now, reducing unemployment and probably the deficit compared to GDP as well. But the Republican Right is so determine to delegitimize the President and make sure that his is a failed Presidency. Almost every Black person and many Whites in America know in their hearts that the real (unsaid) issue is race. And again, the Republican right in Congress is willing to destroy the country's economy to delegitimize the President and make sure that his is a failed Presidency. 15 Reasons Why American Politics Has Become An Apocalyptic Mess Why is America on the edge of a political and fiscal nervous breakdown? We aren't fighting an external threat: no foreign ism or axis. We're simply shackled by our inability to deal with our own finances. By: Howard Fineman — Huffington Post — 10/16/2013 Why? Here are the 15 reasons: 1. The Tea Party In radical reaction to the Wall Street bailout of 2008, the stimulus of 2009 and Obamacare in 2010, the tea party aims to defund and delegitimize the federal government. Crippling the legislative machinery is a means, but also an end in itself. 2. Slow Growth The tea party has a point -- up to a point. Politicians flagrantly overspend on wars and social programs simultaneously because the U.S. economy had always risen fast enough to keep us afloat. That era is now over. We have to make painful choices, but aren't willing to confront them frankly. 3. Obamacare The U.S. was the only major industrial country without national heath care, and even though Obamacare relies on the typical American mix of private sector profit and government regulation, it remains a bone in the throat of American politics. No entitlement program ever passed with so little bipartisan support (though Social Security was close). President Barack Obama assumed that a favorable Supreme Court ruling and his own reelection in 2012 would settle the issue. He was wrong. Whether he could have done anything else to soothe the tea party fear and anger is doubtful, but he didn't really try. 4. Scorecards The AFL-CIO invented a rating system for "pro-labor" voting records; Christian conservatives adopted it. But anti-tax activist Grover Norquist and Heritage Foundation President Jim DeMint amped up the EFTA01189466 volume. Republican members of Congress live in mortal fear of a bad rating and vote accordingly. 5. Two Cultures Americans used to inhabit a world of shared social mores, even if millions of people were coerced into accepting them. Now voters now live in two barely overlapping moral worlds: Secular Metropolitan America and Biblical Traditional America. And that separation is enhanced by the isolating force of modern media. Americans can spend most of their waiting hours enveloped in one journalistic gestalt or another, staring at one cable show/website version of reality or the other. It makes political differences harder to bridge. 6. Congressional Ignorance For a host of reasons -- the collapse of Congress' committee system, the frantic pace of media coverage, the increasing complexity of legislation, the rise of massive, catch-all "continuing resolutions," the time spent on raising campaign cash -- for all of those reasons and others, a shocking number of lawmakers have no idea what they are debating, denouncing or voting on. "An amazing percentage of people here are intellectually lazy or distracted or ignorant or all three," one senator told me, anonymously. 7. Gargantuan Money As Democratic strategist James Carville once said, money is not only the "milk of politics, it is the powdered milk and even the evaporated milk." But not since the Gilded Age has fantastically rich money been able to exert such single-minded and focused control. The U.S. Supreme Court is hell-bent on expanding that power. The result so far has been to unchain the militantly anti-government right, led by the billionaire likes of the Koch brothers and Sheldon Adelson. They have neither the patience for nor a belief in the "regular order" of Congress or its half-a-loaf legislative agreements. They are used to spending cash to enforce their unconditional way. 8. No Big Tents Political parties have collapsed as a means of whipping up consent. They don't control the money; fat cats do. They don't control the agenda; ideological interest groups do. All they have left is their reassuring absolutes: no new taxes for Republicans; defend Social Security, Medicare and Obamacare for Democrats. The more ideologically monochromatic the parties have become, the less able they are to engineer pragmatic legislative deals. As political scholars Norm Ornstein and Tom Mann put it, we now have all-or- nothing parliamentary-style "tribal" parties in a delicately balanced separation-of-powers system. 9. My District Is My Castle Gerrymandering is nothing new. The name and the practice date to the early 19th century. But a combination of technology and federal civil rights laws has produced an unusually large number of "safe" congressional districts, both red and blue. Democrats obtained more high-percentage "minority" districts; Republicans used control of state legislatures to draw more white conservative ones. The situation suited both parties, if not the country. The result: tea party Republicans can issue demands with impunity, and "moderate" Republicans risk a challenge from the right if they're seen as collaborators. 10. The End Of 'Regular Order' EFTA01189467  The old legislative machinery of Congress has been largely destroyed, which means that every major bill is an existential crisis and every crisis a possible meltdown. Budget reforms of the 1970s, meant to smooth the flow of financial decisions, gummed up the works instead. The committee system lies in ruins, robbed of patronage, earmarks, privacy and seniority — that is, the discipline and grease that enabled deal-making. Everything is rolled into one life-or-death struggle. u. They Either Don't Know Or Hate Each Other Congress mirrors our socially divided culture. Members have little contact with those in the other party. They are too busy raising money, feeding their favorite media beasts or plotting partisan strategy. The "schmooze factor" can be overrated, but deep personal relationships do help, as MSNBC host and former Hill staffer Chris Matthews documents in his new book, Tip and the Gipper: When Politics Worked. Today it's just the opposite: Members of one party campaign against their "colleagues" in the other, even showing up in person in that colleague's home state or district. Check out the relationship between Senate leaders Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell. 12. Misjudging Obama Much of the "mainstream media" has dismissed the president as a weak negotiator, and many Democrats were upset at his deals to extend the Bush tax cuts in 2010, to install the sequestration mechanism in 2011 and not to enact more sweeping tax hikes in 2012. But that chatter led Republicans to underestimate Obama's resolve and to assume they could force concessions on the one item he held most dear: Obamacare. It was a disastrous tactical choice. The public has doubts about the health care program - - doubts reinforced by the sloppy rollout of the insurance exchanges. But the public also doesn't want to use the government shutdown or debt ceiling fight to send health care messages. 13. The New Iowa There once was a hiatus between presidential campaigns. And there used to be a tradition that new senators didn't start running for president the moment they arrived in Washington. No more. The insatiable demands of fundraising, organizing and media attention are one reason. Then-Sen. Obama's example in 2005 is another. No wonder Sen. Ted Cruz, who arrived only months ago, is leading the Republican rebellion as way to run for president. He couldn't care less if he ever passes a bill in Congress. In fact, his whole campaign is premised on not passing things. 14. Apocalypse America Win-win is a cool idea -- for social media and much of business life. But America's public and entertainment culture wants a narrative of total victory, crushing blows, winner-take-all contests and paranoid, apocalyptic sagas. White House aides talk about "breaking the will" of the tea party, and they glory in each new poll that shows the GOP's public approval is plummeting toward single digits. (Yet how can you celebrate a prostrate GOP if the worldwide economy is in shambles?) We live in a time when ultimate fighting trumps boxing; football trumps baseball; talent contests trump variety shows; "The Walking Dead" is the new "Friends." No wonder Washington is the way it is. The biters are everywhere. 15. You're Not My President It's hard to know when in the modern era Americans stopped believing that whoever was president was president of all the people. It may have started with Lyndon Johnson, whose ascension after the EFTA01189468 assassination of John F. Kennedy was bitterly resented by the Kennedy crowd. Many voters came to see Richard Nixon as an illegal usurper. In 1992, many Republicans refused to accept the legitimacy of Bill Clinton's election, an attitude that led ultimately to his impeachment. But there is nothing in recent decades to match the visceral fear and hatred that a minority of Americans express for Barack Obama, whom they see as an alien, dictatorial force. There is no denying there is an element of race and xenophobia to it. To be sure, Obama's most passionate foes wouldn't like any big-city, liberal, Harvard-trained constitutional lawyer. But the fact that this one is black and has an unusual-for-America name just adds to the alienation. Obama's fans flocked to him because of his biography. But the flip side of hagiography is demonization, and that is where his enemies are now. To say the least, that makes doing a deal with him difficult. Somehow the country survived this past week, month and several years of political dysfunctionality in Washington by avoiding the latest self-inflected crisis of the combined government shutdown and House Republicans threat to not raise the federal government debt ceiling to the relief of Wall Street, International Banks, bond holders and economic allies. But lost in this latest hoopla is that after three years of "recovery," one in seven Americans who would like full-time work can't find a full-time job. Millions of Americans have lost their homes, and millions more are at risk. Since 2007, the median wealth of African American and Latino families has fallen by more than half. In the midst of all of this suffering, US corporate profits are at an all-time high. The richest 1 percent of Americans have enjoyed soaring incomes for more than three decades, with the richest 400 Americans having a combined wealth in excess of the bottom 120 million Americans. The U.S. economy and the human beings it ought to serve are suffering, first and foremost, from a Jobs Deficit. Closing this gap -- facilitating the creation of good jobs — should be the very top priority of Congress and the White House. B ut it isn't. Instead, our leaders remain engaged in a terribly misguided squabble over how best to lower the federal budget deficit. The current impasse -- the government shutdown and the Republicans' refusal to raise the debt ceiling -- is just one (especially appalling) episode in a long-running drama. As Tim Koechlin pointed out in The Huffington Post this week in his piece - The Wrong Deficit: Full Employment Requires More Spending and More Borrowing, Not Less - President Obama's vision for the budget and the country differs substantially from that of the GOP, for sure. But President Obama has, unfortunately, embraced the faulty premise that deficit reduction should be a top priority. He, along with a chorus of deficit hawks, longs for a "grand bargain" that would get the debt and the deficit "under control." Here is the problem: in a stagnant economy, cutting spending is a terrible idea. Cutting spending during a recession is like blood-letting an anemic patient (or invading Iraq to avenge an attack by Al- Qaeda): it is precisely the wrong intervention. The U.S. economy needs more spending, not less. Check your economics textbook. This is indeed the worst downturn since the Great Depression. How did the Great Depression finally come to an end? After nearly a decade of mass unemployment, stagnation, foreclosures, bankruptcies, and muddled policy (sound familiar?) the US government massively increased its spending to pay for the War; that is, it ran enormous budget deficits. War spending put people to work; these newly employed workers spent their income, and this spending created jobs for others. Between 1939 and 1945 the national debt increased by a factor of six. Was this a "burden for future generations"? Hardly. The post-war generation and their Baby Boomer kids benefited enormously from this debt-financed recovery. They inherited some debt, sure, but they also inherited an economy that provided them with vast economic, educational and personal opportunities -- and higher incomes. The three decades following WWII brought rising incomes for every class of Americans; the income of the median U.S. household doubled! By any measure, this debt-financed spending was a wildly successful investment. The most effective way to reduce the current Jobs Deficit, and to provide opportunities for our kids now and in the future, is for the government spend more -- for schools, teachers, universities, EFTA01189469 infrastructure, alternative energy, mass transit, safe workplaces, and safe food and water. This spending would create jobs today, lighten the load of those who are hurting the most, and promote jobs and competitiveness in the long run. Serious, well-funded efforts to liberate home owners from their enormous debt burden would help to re-ignite consumer spending and the housing market. And what's more, increased spending would also be good for business. Rising demand means rising revenues, and an incentive to hire workers. In stagnant economy, wise deficit spending should be understood as an investment. The Republican response to our current economic crisis is as familiar as it is appalling: more tax cuts for the rich; more tax cuts for corporations; less regulation of Wall Street; attacks on public sector unions and immigrants; and cuts in programs that benefit the middle class and the poor, including Head Start, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. This is the essence of Representative Paul Ryan's proposed 10-year budget, which got unanimous support from House Republicans last year. This vision is not only appalling and mean-spirited, it is bad economics. That is, these policies would promote inequality and stifle growth. (And, by the way: tax cuts do not reduce deficits!). Right Wing fantasies notwithstanding, spending under President Obama has been remarkably stingy -- too stingy! Indeed, public sector employment has declined by 600,000 since President Obama took office. The "sequester" cuts $85 billion from the 2013 federal budget and $1.2 trillion over the next ten years. Insufficient demand explains the Jobs Deficit, not "high" corporate taxes, not regulation, not immigration, not "uncertainty" about taxation and regulation, and not the budget deficit. To eliminate the Jobs Deficit, the government needs to spend -- and borrow -- more, not less. The politics of the moment makes a bold economic stimulus plan unlikely. Still, at the very least, we need to recognize that an ongoing obsession with the budget deficit is misguided and dangerous. Further spending cuts will slow economic and employment growth, and inflict still more unnecessary pain on millions of Americans. I get so angry when I hear politicians and television pundits suggest that the largest economic problem in the country is that as the population ages, our children and future generations are being saddled with unnecessary debt, as if the current generation and its forefathers should not be given credit for the fact that in spite of our problems your children are inheriting the richest and one of the best run countries on the planet with unbridled potential. And to suggest that our seniors are only takers, without acknowledging their sacrifices and contributions is shameful. I watched a piece on NBC News this week that profiled a football coach who suited up special needs students with the team on game day so that they could experience what it is like to be a member of the team and to remind players of how lucky there are and their responsibility to those less fortunate. We like to celebrate individuals who go out of their way to help those less fortunate. So why as a country are we resistant to make it our number one priority to make sure that no one in America goes to bed hungry and everyone has the opportunity to make a living wage? And no matter how efficient the private sector is, this is not a priority. Our major corporations are doing better than ever, hording more than $2 trillion in cash outside of the country to avoid taxes. And at the same time, the top 1% of Americans have received more than 40% of the country's wealth generated over the last four years. So the money is available if we make sure that it spread around. Investing in education, healthcare, infrastructure and our young are investments that benefit every American. So why don't we do this? Think about it, we can cut all that we want but without investment we will not grow and you don't have to be an economist to know this. You can tell a lot about a person by how they accept defeat. Ted Cruz, who just nine months on the job, had managed to drag down his Republican Party to historic unpopularity. But as Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) went to the Senate floor Wednesday afternoon to announce a deal that would begin to repair the damage Cruz inflicted, the renegade couldn't resist one more poke at his leadership. As McConnell was speaking on the floor about his compromise to end the government shutdown and to avoid a federal default, Cruz marched up to the bank of TV cameras outside the Senate chamber to deliver his own statement. EFTA01189470 CNN's Dana Bash told him that the news networks were airing McConnell's speech live. "Do you want to wait until the leaders are done?" she asked. Cruz did not want to wait. He launched right into a condemnation of the deal McConnell had negotiated. "Unfortunately, once again, it appears the Washington establishment is refusing to listen to the American people," the Texan intoned, his protruding chin bouncing as the vitriol poured from the lips above it. "The United States Senate has stayed with the traditional approach of the Washington establishment of maintaining the status quo." The amount of wreckage Cruz has caused in such a short time is truly awe-inspiring. He has damaged his party, hurt the economy, lowered the nation's standing and set back the conservative cause. But appearing at the Capitol on Wednesday morning, he wore a broad smile as reporters and cameras surrounded him to learn what further mayhem he was planning. As Cruz and others filed in to hear McConnell's compromise, Republican senators made little effort to conceal their frustration with Cruz. "This has been a very bad two weeks for the Republican brand, for conservatism," said Sen. Lindsey Graham (S.C.). Cruz did make one gesture that acknowledged he may have gone too far: He said he wouldn't use procedural hurdles to delay a vote on the debt-limit bill, a move that could have forced the nation into default. "I never had any intention to delay this vote," he told a clump of reporters as he emerged from the Senate session, even though he had declined to disavow such a delay when asked only an hour earlier. But otherwise, Cruz refused to admit defeat. "The American people rose up and spoke with an overwhelming voice and at least at this stage Washington isn't listening to them," he said. "But this battle will continue." (Actually, what's overwhelming is the 70 percent of Americans who think Republicans put politics ahead of the country in the shutdown.) Cruz left the reporters after a few minutes, but when he noticed the TV lights and microphones outside the Senate chamber, he stopped and reversed himself. After repeating his statement for the cameras, he took a question from CNN's Bash, who pointed out that there has been "a lot of bruising political warfare internally, and you've got nothingfor it." "I disagree with the premise,"Cruz informed her. He said the House vote to defund Obamacare, rejected by the Senate, was "a remarkable victory." It was a revealing statement: For Cruz, the victory is not the achievement or a solution, but the fight. "victory" cost American taxpayers $24 billion, lots of human suffering and immense damage to the country's reputation here and abroad. And this guy wants to be President But then what should be expected from someone who believes in their heart that government is "the problem and that his dismantling it is the only solution." EFTA01189471 Totally overlooked this week was an article in Dayton Daily News that exposed — that brand new cargo planes on order for the U.S. Air Force are being delivered straight into storage in the Arizona desert because the military has no use for them. A dozen nearly new C-27J Spartans from Ohio and elsewhere already have been taken out of service and shipped to the so-called "boneyard" at Davis- Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson. Five more are expected to be built by April, all of which are headed to the boneyard unless another use for them is found. The Air Force has spent $567 million on 21 C- 27J aircraft since 2007, according to purchasing officials at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. Sixteen had been delivered by the end of September. r°7777C•7 ,354 4. Ztht;' ,1? • ger ."•34 13;;; *5 4. ' Y tv-P4P jr,r1S t f e r re. f Tr4-. c ✓ tr e ..yr .- Like the Army with the Abrams Tanks, the Air Force was forced to buy more of the planes against its will, the newspaper found. A solicitation issued from Wright-Patterson in May sought vendors to build more C-27Js, citing congressional language requiring the military to spend money budgeted for the planes, despite Pentagon protests. The military initially wanted the C-27J because it had unique capabilities, such as the ability to take off and land on less-developed runways, said Ethan Rosenkranz, national security analyst at the Project on Government Oversight. When sequestration hit, the military realized the planes weren't a necessity but instead a luxury it couldn't afford, he said. EFTA01189472 "When they start discarding these programs, it's wasteful," he said. O'Hanlon said their near- resurrection was largely due to parochialism. "It's too bad and a waste," he said. "I'm not sure the program was ever a white elephant, and yet given budget cuts, I'm not sure it should be saved now." Ohio's Senate delegation was among the most ardent defenders of the C-27J when a mission at Mansfield Air National Guard Base, and 800 jobs there, were dependent on it. Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio and six other Democratic senators wrote a letter in 2011 urging the military to buy up to 42 of the aircraft, saying too few planes "will weaken our national and homeland defense." Then came sequestration and a nearly trillion-dollar cut to the Pentagon's projected spending over the next nine years. That will bring the military's budget down to roughly 2006-07 levels, Rosenkranz said. Former Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz testified before Congress last year that the military wanted to divest its C-27J fleet to come in line with budget cuts. He said the C-130 can do everything the military requires and costs $213 million to fly over its 25-year lifespan. The C-27J would cost $308 million per aircraft. "In this fiscal environment, it certainly caught our attention," Schwartz said. That put the Mansfield base in peril, and Brown along with Republican Sen. Rob Portman, who in February 2012 called the aircraft "critically important," worked to save the C-27J. However, President Barack Obama, after making a campaign stop in Mansfield last year, promised to "find a mission" for the base. This led to eight C-13os being transferred to the base, giving it about 4o more full-time and 200 more part-time military positions. That also left it with the same mission it had prior to a cost- saving round of base closures in 2005. Now the U.S. Senate is poised to strip the requirement that the Pentagon spend money on new planes from the 2014 defense budget, and Wright-Patterson officials are saying they were told to put a hold on purchasing. What should be alarming isn't that these planes were purchased unnecessarily but that scuffling more than a half a billion in new plane when almost totally unnoticed and not one member of Congress mentioned this outrage. If Wall Street is now an unregulated casino, because slot machines are better regulated than derivatives, Congress has truly become farcical theater (and like Hollywood) dispense taxpayer money on their pet projects, patrons and friends. Therefore, if Ted Cruz need needs a "real" cause to establish his credentials as a warier against government waste and abuse, why not start with the Defense Department, who can throw away a half billion dollars of brand new equipment and no one notices. EFTA01189473 As most of you know, I am a huge fan of our President Barack Obama. And although I haven't agreed with everything that he has done, (expanding the War in Afghanistan, not making Wall Street pay for the greed and malfeasance that created the worst recession since the Great Depression, hurting the country and causing untold misery for tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions Americans and not standing firm against his Republican opposition who declared from Dayi, their Number One priority was to make his a failed Presidency), I have to give him props for how he has out-foxed his competitor, often with the ease, confidence and artistry of Walt "Clyde "Fraser's jump-shot back in the day. And the latest example is how he stood his ground against Republican Conservative failed tactics of shutting down the federal government and threatening to not raise the country's debt ceiling (which might have cost economic chaos for the country). Not only did he not cave, when he refuse to be black