Journalists continue to feed the American public information from sources that have already been discredited. The sources are retired military officers and a U.S. Senator. On "Meet the Press" today, moderator David Gregory's topic was Afghanistan and what should be done about that war and what President Obama's decision might be. His guest were U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham, retired Generals Barry McCaffrey and Richard Myers who was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the Bush administration and U.S. Senator Carl Levin.
Senator Graham and retired General McCaffrey and Myers who supported the war and occupation of Iraq over WMD that did not exist and have no credibility when it comes to that war or the war in Afghanistan would support 40,000 additional U.S. troops and pretty much said both wars are comparable, are once again given the American people a rerun of the Iraq war. Graham went so far as to say give the generals any increase in troops they request.
Senator Levin said a request for more U.S. troops is not the answer to winning the war in Afghanistan and said training Afghans to secure their own country would be more productive. David Gregory asked the following stupid question and it showed how the news media is so tuned out to the real issue on the war. He asked, "Since President Obama is taking a long time to make his decision, should that be taken as the President being weak." Of course Gregory could not articulate why Obama's willingness to get broad advice from his advisers makes him a weak President. Bush never sought such advise and input from a broad section of people with experience before he ordered the invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan and those wars are still going on while Bush has gone fishing. Obama now has to pick up the pieces and our men and women in uniform are still paying the ultimate price.
Gregory also had a panel of journalists on after to discuss the war. Bob Woodward of the Washington Post pointed out how Obama was consulting a wide range of advisers and asking tough questions to justify their recommendations and that is why Obama has not made his decision yet. Paul Gigot, editorial page editor of the Wall Street Journal and a conservative himself showed by his facial expressions and his comments he is not a supporter of Obama concerning the war. Lindsey, Gigot, McCaffrey and Myers have learned nothing from the wars in those two countries, yet Gregory was willing to expose the American people to their ignorance once again and when it comes to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan some journalists could care less what propaganda is fed the American people. That is a sad note for our country and especially our men and women in uniform.
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Sunday, October 4, 2009
The Latest Economic Numbers
The U.S. Labor Department announced that September unemployment rate rose to 9.8%, up from 9.7% in August. The economy lost 263,000 jobs that same month compared to the revised down figure for August which was 201,000 job losses. The Department also reported 15.1 million Americans are out of work and 7.2 million jobs have been lost since December 2007 when the recession began. Hourly earnings rose by a penny last month while weekly wages fell $1.54 to $616.11.
The latest numbers indicate the severe effects of the recession and that more time will pass before the country and its people will see job growth of any significant numbers. The American people are nervous and restless and are searching for over night solutions but none exist. There is too much wealth in too few hands for that to happen. The job losses in 2008 were averaging over 500,000 a month. That number has been reduced so far this year which means part of the stimulus is working.
Consumers are not spending freely yet because they are still unsure of the future. Consumer spending represents the largest part of the economy and once the job picture improves to where businesses are starting to hire again, the consumer will respond. The American people should also realize that there are those voices out there who prey on bad times and offer false information and preach despair. Many Americans affected by the recession have never experienced an economic collapse of our financial structure as severe as this one. President Roosevelt had to put the country in debt to put our people to work during WWII for the war effort. The WPA and other government programs were created to put our people to work and it worked well for America.
Those voices who are opposed to the stimulus spending and are now talking about deficit spending at the time the country is in an economic crisis were silent during the record deficit spending of President's Reagan, Bush 41 and Bush 43 which totaled 20 years. None of those Presidents faced the severe economic problems the country faces today. In fact President Bush 43 inherited the greatest economy, job creation and balanced budgets and surpluses and turned all of that around. Those same voices were also silent the whole time wealth was being transferred from the average worker to the wealthy.
Patience is not easy to practice when you lose your job, your home and have to provide for your family or your own well being. However, the negative voices who have nothing to offer but blame and who stood on the side lines all the while the country was going into recession while supporting the status quo deserve to be tuned out.
America and its people will come out of these hard times and there will be a reason to feel good again. I would advise the people to stop and think for themselves, we the people are smart enough to figure out what is really going on and and act accordingly. We all need to be leaders instead of followers. Those who preach in the negative have a character problem that will not allow them to compete where common sense and intelligence rules.
The latest numbers indicate the severe effects of the recession and that more time will pass before the country and its people will see job growth of any significant numbers. The American people are nervous and restless and are searching for over night solutions but none exist. There is too much wealth in too few hands for that to happen. The job losses in 2008 were averaging over 500,000 a month. That number has been reduced so far this year which means part of the stimulus is working.
Consumers are not spending freely yet because they are still unsure of the future. Consumer spending represents the largest part of the economy and once the job picture improves to where businesses are starting to hire again, the consumer will respond. The American people should also realize that there are those voices out there who prey on bad times and offer false information and preach despair. Many Americans affected by the recession have never experienced an economic collapse of our financial structure as severe as this one. President Roosevelt had to put the country in debt to put our people to work during WWII for the war effort. The WPA and other government programs were created to put our people to work and it worked well for America.
Those voices who are opposed to the stimulus spending and are now talking about deficit spending at the time the country is in an economic crisis were silent during the record deficit spending of President's Reagan, Bush 41 and Bush 43 which totaled 20 years. None of those Presidents faced the severe economic problems the country faces today. In fact President Bush 43 inherited the greatest economy, job creation and balanced budgets and surpluses and turned all of that around. Those same voices were also silent the whole time wealth was being transferred from the average worker to the wealthy.
Patience is not easy to practice when you lose your job, your home and have to provide for your family or your own well being. However, the negative voices who have nothing to offer but blame and who stood on the side lines all the while the country was going into recession while supporting the status quo deserve to be tuned out.
America and its people will come out of these hard times and there will be a reason to feel good again. I would advise the people to stop and think for themselves, we the people are smart enough to figure out what is really going on and and act accordingly. We all need to be leaders instead of followers. Those who preach in the negative have a character problem that will not allow them to compete where common sense and intelligence rules.
Friday, October 2, 2009
The United States and Cuba
I have written a few commentaries concerning the U.S. and Cuba and that it was time for the U.S. to make a move to bring Cuba back to a diplomatic relationship with the U.S. and once again become an ally. My first commentary was dated 11/23/07, almost 2 years ago.
President Obama made the first move toward Cuba a few months ago and liberalized visits between the two countries and just this week it was reported that a senior U.S. Diplomat traveled to Havana and held high-level talks with Cuban officials, that according to our State Department. The visit lasted 6 days and our Diplomat even visited with Cuban opposition activists to discuss their political views.
Cuba, being only 90 miles from our shore should be given the opportunity with its people to establish a working relationship with the U.S. Cuba is a natural for commerce between both countries. A friendly Cuba with no military axe to grind would also enhance the security of our hemisphere.
Fifty plus years of embargo did nothing to oust Fidel Castro or change their communist rule. We live in a different time under very different conditions and the status quo has not made the U.S. any safer. Cuba, an island, is no military or political threat to the U.S. It is time for the President to see this thing through.
President Obama made the first move toward Cuba a few months ago and liberalized visits between the two countries and just this week it was reported that a senior U.S. Diplomat traveled to Havana and held high-level talks with Cuban officials, that according to our State Department. The visit lasted 6 days and our Diplomat even visited with Cuban opposition activists to discuss their political views.
Cuba, being only 90 miles from our shore should be given the opportunity with its people to establish a working relationship with the U.S. Cuba is a natural for commerce between both countries. A friendly Cuba with no military axe to grind would also enhance the security of our hemisphere.
Fifty plus years of embargo did nothing to oust Fidel Castro or change their communist rule. We live in a different time under very different conditions and the status quo has not made the U.S. any safer. Cuba, an island, is no military or political threat to the U.S. It is time for the President to see this thing through.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
A Sickness At The Fox News Network
They think of themselves as the elite. Neoconservatives by their tell tale comments. They think they are better than any one else because of their self claimed conservatism but they represent a conservatism that is much different than America practices. I am speaking about Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly. Management at the Fox News represent the same warped ideology.
Brit Hume, Bill Kristol, Dennis Miller and Newt Gingrich are regular guest, Hume having retired not too long ago. They can be described as the seven "ditto heads" who feel so inadequate they have nothing of positive value to contribute to the broadcast media. They like patting each other on the back, it builds up their confidence and lack of esteem. I laugh when they point to Fox News being a top rated cable network. It reminds me of one of President Truman's famous quotes. "A President needs political understanding to run the government, but he may be elected without it." (end of quote)
The seven "ditto heads" hide behind conservatism because they can't compete with our American heritage that every ones opinion counts and that diversity does matter. Their lack of understanding and wisdom is a direct result of their inadequate feeling. It is a sickness that really showed during the Presidency of George Bush when they could not articulate what the President and conservatism accomplished so they spent 8 years attacking democrats. That sickness is still being played out now against President Obama and his administration.
Beck, O'Reilly and Hannity represent three hours of cable "spin." (not counting their reruns) What really ticks them off about most of the so called "liberals" they berate, is that many of those "liberals" served their country in uniform. When you feel insecure and inadequate, attack, attack, the usual conservative ploy. Fox news claims to be "fair and balanced" but that is exactly what is lacking the most in their broadcast. Just the other night Bernie Goldberg who is a frequent guest on Fox and usually agrees with their pronouncements pointed out to O'Reilly that Fox's coverage of the town hall meetings on health care and the so called tax tea party were not fair and balanced. O'Reilly got his nose out of joint and his dander up. O'Reilly and Fox do not like when some one throws a challenge at their double standard.
The sickness at Fox news of trying to destroy those who have different views is a threat to our freedom. Their cry baby attitude toward President Obama because he would not appear on their network and take part in their charade is evidence of how sick the network has become.
Brit Hume, Bill Kristol, Dennis Miller and Newt Gingrich are regular guest, Hume having retired not too long ago. They can be described as the seven "ditto heads" who feel so inadequate they have nothing of positive value to contribute to the broadcast media. They like patting each other on the back, it builds up their confidence and lack of esteem. I laugh when they point to Fox News being a top rated cable network. It reminds me of one of President Truman's famous quotes. "A President needs political understanding to run the government, but he may be elected without it." (end of quote)
The seven "ditto heads" hide behind conservatism because they can't compete with our American heritage that every ones opinion counts and that diversity does matter. Their lack of understanding and wisdom is a direct result of their inadequate feeling. It is a sickness that really showed during the Presidency of George Bush when they could not articulate what the President and conservatism accomplished so they spent 8 years attacking democrats. That sickness is still being played out now against President Obama and his administration.
Beck, O'Reilly and Hannity represent three hours of cable "spin." (not counting their reruns) What really ticks them off about most of the so called "liberals" they berate, is that many of those "liberals" served their country in uniform. When you feel insecure and inadequate, attack, attack, the usual conservative ploy. Fox news claims to be "fair and balanced" but that is exactly what is lacking the most in their broadcast. Just the other night Bernie Goldberg who is a frequent guest on Fox and usually agrees with their pronouncements pointed out to O'Reilly that Fox's coverage of the town hall meetings on health care and the so called tax tea party were not fair and balanced. O'Reilly got his nose out of joint and his dander up. O'Reilly and Fox do not like when some one throws a challenge at their double standard.
The sickness at Fox news of trying to destroy those who have different views is a threat to our freedom. Their cry baby attitude toward President Obama because he would not appear on their network and take part in their charade is evidence of how sick the network has become.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Health Care And Medicare
The health care issue being debated by congress has spilled over to the issue of medicare. Those who are opposed to President Obama's proposed health care plan have put up every road block they can including alleging that health care reform will destroy medicare that has been taken care of senior citizens for many years.
Medicare has been a saving staple for seniors and others who qualify for the program and any reduction in benefits would seriously impact those that receive the benefit. Seniors also pay a monthly premium through social security deductions for medicare. Medicare plays a significant role in the life of seniors and allows seniors to have a better quality of life. Theywould naturally have concern if medicare no longer provided the services they have come to depend on.
The U.S. House on September 24 voted 406-18 to eliminate all premimum increases for medicare Part B for next year. Medicare is a democratic created program that was opposed by the republican party. Many in the republican party still oppose medicare. The bottom line is that no democratic administration will do anything to undo those benefits that have been taking care of senior's need for over 30 years.
Medicare has been a saving staple for seniors and others who qualify for the program and any reduction in benefits would seriously impact those that receive the benefit. Seniors also pay a monthly premium through social security deductions for medicare. Medicare plays a significant role in the life of seniors and allows seniors to have a better quality of life. Theywould naturally have concern if medicare no longer provided the services they have come to depend on.
The U.S. House on September 24 voted 406-18 to eliminate all premimum increases for medicare Part B for next year. Medicare is a democratic created program that was opposed by the republican party. Many in the republican party still oppose medicare. The bottom line is that no democratic administration will do anything to undo those benefits that have been taking care of senior's need for over 30 years.
Iran, Threat Or Nuisance
Is Iran a real threat to the national security of the United States. Are they a real threat to the national security of Israel, or for the region. I have yet to hear a real debate about the issue. But there are some things we do know that is never discussed, so lets try and explore the issue here.
I can not think of any country Iran has threatened to attack or invade lately but I can think of a country who has threatened to attack Iran. Iran's history is not one that has attacked or invaded another country in my life time.
Iran has said the Jewish state should be destroyed, but never said that they would be the ones to do so, and for good reasons. They know their country would be destroyed along with their leaders. On the other hand, Israel has used its military power to preempt attacks on Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.
Time will tell if Iran is developing nuclear weapons. If they do they are not going to launch an attack against Israel or the United States for the same reasons mentioned above and for the same reasons Russia never launched a nuclear attack against the U.S. in 40 years of a cold war. Iran would not pass nuclear weapons to terriorists for the same reasons.
The U.S. launched a war with Iraq over WMD that did not exist and our men and women in uniform paid dearly for that mistake. The nuclear inspection arm of the U.N. has been inspecting Iran's nuclear facilities since day one. Israel, India and Pakistan do not allow such inspections to its nuclear facilities. The case could be made that if any country starts a nuclear war in that part of the world it will be Pakistan, Israel or India since they are unchecked nuclear powers.
Iran gets under Israel's skin when they deny the holocaust but it is obvious the leaders and people of Iran know it happened. Iran taunts Israel just like Israel taunts Iran but that does not justify war. When a country uses its military power with impunity like Israel does the weak will do whatever they have to do to become strong.
The middle east is an unstable place and more so since the invasion of Iraq. Iraq attacked Iran and started a 10 year war during the 80's. The Reagan administration supported Saddam in that war and gave him intelligence on Iran's troop positions. Israel supported Iran in that war. In other words, two close allies, the U.S. and Israel supported opposite sides during that war. If that makes sense, I am not convinced.
Now on September 25th the nation has been told Iran has been operating a "secret" nuclear facility. The problem is it has not been "secret" to the intelligence community of the U.S., Briton or France. Their leaders have know about the facility for several years and say completion is anywhere from 18 months to 3 years away from being finished. The word "secret" is now being used to work up an appetite for a preemptive strike by those who love to send other peoples children off to war.
The Iran thing reminds me of what happened during the early year of President Kennedy's administration as reported in the book, "JFK and the Unspeakable." And I quote. JULY 20, 1961: At a national security meeting, the joint chiefs of staff and CIA director Allen Dulles presented a plan for a preemptive nuclear attack on the Soviet Union in late 1963, preceded by a period of heightened tensions." President Kennedy walked out of the meeting saying to Secretary of State Dean Rush, "And we call ourselves the human race."
President Kennedy had the wisdom to ignore that advise that would have killed millions on each side in an unnecessary nuclear war. Does the drum beat on Iran sound familiar.
I can not think of any country Iran has threatened to attack or invade lately but I can think of a country who has threatened to attack Iran. Iran's history is not one that has attacked or invaded another country in my life time.
Iran has said the Jewish state should be destroyed, but never said that they would be the ones to do so, and for good reasons. They know their country would be destroyed along with their leaders. On the other hand, Israel has used its military power to preempt attacks on Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.
Time will tell if Iran is developing nuclear weapons. If they do they are not going to launch an attack against Israel or the United States for the same reasons mentioned above and for the same reasons Russia never launched a nuclear attack against the U.S. in 40 years of a cold war. Iran would not pass nuclear weapons to terriorists for the same reasons.
The U.S. launched a war with Iraq over WMD that did not exist and our men and women in uniform paid dearly for that mistake. The nuclear inspection arm of the U.N. has been inspecting Iran's nuclear facilities since day one. Israel, India and Pakistan do not allow such inspections to its nuclear facilities. The case could be made that if any country starts a nuclear war in that part of the world it will be Pakistan, Israel or India since they are unchecked nuclear powers.
Iran gets under Israel's skin when they deny the holocaust but it is obvious the leaders and people of Iran know it happened. Iran taunts Israel just like Israel taunts Iran but that does not justify war. When a country uses its military power with impunity like Israel does the weak will do whatever they have to do to become strong.
The middle east is an unstable place and more so since the invasion of Iraq. Iraq attacked Iran and started a 10 year war during the 80's. The Reagan administration supported Saddam in that war and gave him intelligence on Iran's troop positions. Israel supported Iran in that war. In other words, two close allies, the U.S. and Israel supported opposite sides during that war. If that makes sense, I am not convinced.
Now on September 25th the nation has been told Iran has been operating a "secret" nuclear facility. The problem is it has not been "secret" to the intelligence community of the U.S., Briton or France. Their leaders have know about the facility for several years and say completion is anywhere from 18 months to 3 years away from being finished. The word "secret" is now being used to work up an appetite for a preemptive strike by those who love to send other peoples children off to war.
The Iran thing reminds me of what happened during the early year of President Kennedy's administration as reported in the book, "JFK and the Unspeakable." And I quote. JULY 20, 1961: At a national security meeting, the joint chiefs of staff and CIA director Allen Dulles presented a plan for a preemptive nuclear attack on the Soviet Union in late 1963, preceded by a period of heightened tensions." President Kennedy walked out of the meeting saying to Secretary of State Dean Rush, "And we call ourselves the human race."
President Kennedy had the wisdom to ignore that advise that would have killed millions on each side in an unnecessary nuclear war. Does the drum beat on Iran sound familiar.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Median Income In Louisiana Down
Business writer Jaquetta White of the Times Picayune reported that median household income in Louisiana dropped 7.8% in 2008 compared to the previous year according to the latest U.S. Census Bureau report released earlier this month. The report also showed that residents in all but 11 states and D.C., experienced a drop in income over the year, but that Louisiana had one of the sharpest income declines with just seven states performing worse.
Louisiana median income for 2008 was $39,563.00, down from $42,900.00 in 2007. The U.S. median income for 2008 was $50,303.00 down from $52,163.00 in 2007. In 1998 the Louisiana median income was $41,863.00 and in 2008 $39,563.00. That 10 year period saw a drop of 5.4% in Louisiana median income.
In the article local demographers were not surprised as they say it reflects a resetting of a part of the economy since hurricane Katrina. Demographer Elliot Stonecipher said the 10 year decline is not surprising since there has been a trend in Lojuisiana since at least the early 1990s of an outflow of high-paying jobs and an increase in low-wage ones. Our job base, the concentration of jobs in the service sector, means generally we do fit into that broad definition of a state without any evidence of industries that are higher income.
During that 10 year period mentioned above the Louisiana median income was almost $10,000.00 less per year than the U.S. median income. That would seem to confirm Mr. Stonecipher above comment. It would be nice if a report would be made during the same 10 year period concerning the median incomes of CEO's and executives of the business community. I think a report would show what I have written about on many occasions concerning the transfer of wealth from the middle class to the wealthy.
Louisiana gives away millions of dollars to new and existing businesses in the form of tax breaks, financing for new plants, buying land for business, etc., etc., and the latest report above shows that the state has made no progress in bringing good paying jobs to Louisiana and the state in that 10 year period made no headway in closing the gap between the median income in Louisiana compared to the median income in the U.S.
Priority in Louisiana seems to be, take care of the business community and trickle down economics will lift the average worker up. Unfortunately, that is pure nonsense with a capital N.
Louisiana median income for 2008 was $39,563.00, down from $42,900.00 in 2007. The U.S. median income for 2008 was $50,303.00 down from $52,163.00 in 2007. In 1998 the Louisiana median income was $41,863.00 and in 2008 $39,563.00. That 10 year period saw a drop of 5.4% in Louisiana median income.
In the article local demographers were not surprised as they say it reflects a resetting of a part of the economy since hurricane Katrina. Demographer Elliot Stonecipher said the 10 year decline is not surprising since there has been a trend in Lojuisiana since at least the early 1990s of an outflow of high-paying jobs and an increase in low-wage ones. Our job base, the concentration of jobs in the service sector, means generally we do fit into that broad definition of a state without any evidence of industries that are higher income.
During that 10 year period mentioned above the Louisiana median income was almost $10,000.00 less per year than the U.S. median income. That would seem to confirm Mr. Stonecipher above comment. It would be nice if a report would be made during the same 10 year period concerning the median incomes of CEO's and executives of the business community. I think a report would show what I have written about on many occasions concerning the transfer of wealth from the middle class to the wealthy.
Louisiana gives away millions of dollars to new and existing businesses in the form of tax breaks, financing for new plants, buying land for business, etc., etc., and the latest report above shows that the state has made no progress in bringing good paying jobs to Louisiana and the state in that 10 year period made no headway in closing the gap between the median income in Louisiana compared to the median income in the U.S.
Priority in Louisiana seems to be, take care of the business community and trickle down economics will lift the average worker up. Unfortunately, that is pure nonsense with a capital N.
Monday, September 21, 2009
What Is Next For The Economy
There have been a number of reports in the past few weeks dealing with the economy. Most reports have been up beat, although modest. Housing construction rose in August and the number of Americans who lost their jobs was down two months in a row. Applications for building permits rose 2.7% in August.
The Labor Department reports initial claims for unemployment benefits declined for the third time in the last four weeks. Ben Bernanke, the Fed Chairman said the worst recession since the 1930's is probably over. Household debt for the second quarter is slightly down from the first quarter.
Business is starting to hire again but not at a pace to reverse the job losses of the past 18 months. Job creation and putting America back to work is the key to a sustained economic recovery and a sustained economy. Personal spending is the engine to economic growth.
The key lesson for President Obama is to truly learn from the tragic mistakes of the previous administration, understand how corporate greed played a large part in the economic meltdow by the excesses of Wall Street and the Financial Industry and take real workable measures to safeguard against a repeat performance. The President must also understand how the massive deficit spending and debt of the last three republican administrations have weakened our position and ability to take a hit when the economy falls onto hard times. The question, can corporate America regulate litself, has already been answered with a resounding NO. Their past record is confirmation.
Most of the $787 billion stimulus money will be spent in the fiscal year that begins October 1, 2009 so the states will still be receiving money to help put people to work. It is important that states spend that money wisely on those things that really matter and make a difference for the economy and the people.
The President needs to insist on putting America's house back in operation with sound fiscal policies that eliminate deficit spending. Democratic administrations have done it in the past and can do it again. This has to be a priority and fall in line with bringing the economy back to life. I have reported many times in past articles that balancing the federal budget with sound fiscal policies will allow our country and its people to address what ever problems come along. The past is still the key to the future if we truly take the time to learn from it.
The Labor Department reports initial claims for unemployment benefits declined for the third time in the last four weeks. Ben Bernanke, the Fed Chairman said the worst recession since the 1930's is probably over. Household debt for the second quarter is slightly down from the first quarter.
Business is starting to hire again but not at a pace to reverse the job losses of the past 18 months. Job creation and putting America back to work is the key to a sustained economic recovery and a sustained economy. Personal spending is the engine to economic growth.
The key lesson for President Obama is to truly learn from the tragic mistakes of the previous administration, understand how corporate greed played a large part in the economic meltdow by the excesses of Wall Street and the Financial Industry and take real workable measures to safeguard against a repeat performance. The President must also understand how the massive deficit spending and debt of the last three republican administrations have weakened our position and ability to take a hit when the economy falls onto hard times. The question, can corporate America regulate litself, has already been answered with a resounding NO. Their past record is confirmation.
Most of the $787 billion stimulus money will be spent in the fiscal year that begins October 1, 2009 so the states will still be receiving money to help put people to work. It is important that states spend that money wisely on those things that really matter and make a difference for the economy and the people.
The President needs to insist on putting America's house back in operation with sound fiscal policies that eliminate deficit spending. Democratic administrations have done it in the past and can do it again. This has to be a priority and fall in line with bringing the economy back to life. I have reported many times in past articles that balancing the federal budget with sound fiscal policies will allow our country and its people to address what ever problems come along. The past is still the key to the future if we truly take the time to learn from it.
Sunday, September 20, 2009
A Change In College Aid
The Times Picayune reported the U.S. House of Representatives voted to remove private lenders from the student loan business and put the government in charge. The vote was 253-171 in favor of the proposal. Only six republicans voted in favor and four democrats voted against the bill. According to the report the bill fulfills nearly all of President Obama's campaign promise for higher education.
The measure ends subsidies for private lenders and allows the government to send the money direct to students. The report pointed out the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) says that when administration cost and market conditions are considered the savings from switching to direct government lending would be $47 billion. Republicans said the bill could end up costing the government more money and republican John Kline said the numbers just don't add up. Mr. Kline offered no numbers or explaination to refute the CBO numbers, just the usual conservative rhetoric.
Republicans also argued against putting the government in control of student lending. The fact is private lenders can still make student loans if they want to, they just don't receive federal subsidies for doing so. This writer, a veteran, went to college on the G.I. bill and my check came direct from the government.
Members of Louisiana's republican delegation in congress who voted against the bill were; Bustany, Alexander, Cassidy, Fleming and Scalise. Republican Cao and democrat Melacon voted with the majority and for the bill. Representative Cao, who has been in congress only eight months once again showed his maturity over his republican college with his yes vote. The gang of five who voted against the measure were once again willing to walk the party line and oppose anything coming out of the Obama administration.
The people of Louisiana should take note.
The measure ends subsidies for private lenders and allows the government to send the money direct to students. The report pointed out the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) says that when administration cost and market conditions are considered the savings from switching to direct government lending would be $47 billion. Republicans said the bill could end up costing the government more money and republican John Kline said the numbers just don't add up. Mr. Kline offered no numbers or explaination to refute the CBO numbers, just the usual conservative rhetoric.
Republicans also argued against putting the government in control of student lending. The fact is private lenders can still make student loans if they want to, they just don't receive federal subsidies for doing so. This writer, a veteran, went to college on the G.I. bill and my check came direct from the government.
Members of Louisiana's republican delegation in congress who voted against the bill were; Bustany, Alexander, Cassidy, Fleming and Scalise. Republican Cao and democrat Melacon voted with the majority and for the bill. Representative Cao, who has been in congress only eight months once again showed his maturity over his republican college with his yes vote. The gang of five who voted against the measure were once again willing to walk the party line and oppose anything coming out of the Obama administration.
The people of Louisiana should take note.
Friday, September 18, 2009
A Wise Foreign Policy Decision
As reported in the Times Picayune, President Obama announced Thursday September 18 he cancelled former President Bush's plans to install a missile defense shield in the Czech Republic and in Poland. Instead the U.S. will deploy smaller interceptors by 2011. The President said the new system will provide stronger, smarter and swifter defenses of U.S. forces and America's allies to meet a changing threat from Iran.
The President said the new assesment of the Iranian threat required a different system using existing technology and that the new approach will provide capabilities sooner, build on proven systems and offer greater defenses against the threat of missile attack.
Republican critics do what they always do. They said the President caved in to Russia. They are so out of touch they did not even try to rebut the reasons given by the President for the action he took. The republican response is only the beginning of their opposition to everything Obama does concerning foreign and domestic policy.
President Obama's decision was a wise one. He knew the proposed missile shield if installed in Russia's back yard would start a new arms race with that country. Who needs a new arms race when the U.S. and other peaceful nations are looking to stop the spread of weapons of war. There is no need for the U.S. because of misjudgement to make Russia stronger than they already are.
The U.S. does not need another costly missile system at this time in our history. The people of our country need a new approach concerning our foreign policy and the President deserves a chance at changing the status quo. This decision by the President does not endanger our national security because the change in policy will rely on proven military technology as the President said. Costly new systems play into the hands of the Military-Industrial complex and those who love to talk tough.
As for the threat from Iran, that will be covered in a future commentary coming soon.
The President said the new assesment of the Iranian threat required a different system using existing technology and that the new approach will provide capabilities sooner, build on proven systems and offer greater defenses against the threat of missile attack.
Republican critics do what they always do. They said the President caved in to Russia. They are so out of touch they did not even try to rebut the reasons given by the President for the action he took. The republican response is only the beginning of their opposition to everything Obama does concerning foreign and domestic policy.
President Obama's decision was a wise one. He knew the proposed missile shield if installed in Russia's back yard would start a new arms race with that country. Who needs a new arms race when the U.S. and other peaceful nations are looking to stop the spread of weapons of war. There is no need for the U.S. because of misjudgement to make Russia stronger than they already are.
The U.S. does not need another costly missile system at this time in our history. The people of our country need a new approach concerning our foreign policy and the President deserves a chance at changing the status quo. This decision by the President does not endanger our national security because the change in policy will rely on proven military technology as the President said. Costly new systems play into the hands of the Military-Industrial complex and those who love to talk tough.
As for the threat from Iran, that will be covered in a future commentary coming soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)