Liberals have been voting for “Democrats” for too many years because the Republicans are “worse”. No doubt. But guess what. Conditions are worse under the Democrats as well.

File:Obama and Valerie Jarrett.jpg

The Rahm Doctrine scores big with the Obama White House whose members have expressed open disdain for liberal supporters.

We liberals are all victims of what I call the Rahm Doctrine, that is, we will vote for a Democrat regardless of his views because we have no place else to go. And since we accept the idea that the Republicans are worse and we have no choice but to vote for Democrats, conditions are indeed worse and will continue on that path.

So according to the Rahm Doctrine, Obama is free to ignore or marginalize his base because they will vote for him regardless of what he does even though he and his administration have openly expressed their disdain for liberal supporters.

Obama’s snark attack on the social safety net could finally destroy the party of the people. If we observe, we can see that the party of the people has morphed into the party of the corporations and it is now very similar to the GOP. The party will survive of course but only as a somewhat lesser monster than the Republican party.

Bill Clinton is largely responsible for the decay that has infested the party. But Obama has taken up the cause. He is an apostate. He has renounced traditional party values by choosing to attack the last vestiges of FDR’s New Deal.

Sad to say that blind devotion to these two tragic figures simply because they have claimed the Democratic mantle validates the Rahm Doctrine which, as I have said, advocates marginalizing liberals while it eats like a cancer at traditional Democratic party values.

So if you are a party loyalist and vote party regardless of policy, I cannot agree with you. But I wish you well nonetheless.



Republican­s are responsibl­e for nearly 75% of the total debt. Granted Democratic Congresses were involved in the accumulati­on. But Republican presidents repeatedly signed off on the debt without so much as a whimper from fellow Republican­s.

File:President Ronald Reagan at a Rally for Senator Durenberger in Minneapolis 1982.jpg
Deficit maven. He was so good at raising the deficit he set records. His record setting deficits were exceeded only by George W. Bush who now holds the record.

The current standoff is nothing more than an attack on the social safety net which Republican­s have long hoped to dismantle. The shock here is that Obama is revealing incredible ineptitude by accommodat­ing the GOP vendetta.

We are actually in the midst of a revenue crisis. Tax collection­s as a percent of GDP are at their lowest levels since the 1950s.

Let’s raise taxes on the wealthy.

Most of the 10 trillion was accumulate­d under Republican presidents­, in many cases supported by Republican majorities in one or both Houses of Congress and by right wing Democrats.

The debt has risen under Obama. But much of it has accumulate­d as a result of sharp revenue decline due to high unemployme­nt and the continuati­on of tax cuts for the wealthy. Also contributi­ng to the deficit are Obama’s continuati­on of the Bush wars; a huge and unnecessar­y war budget; and the Wall Street bailout.

An inadequate stimulus – that included worthless tax cuts; needed aid to the states; and some money for job creation – was also a factor.

The fact remains: There is no crisis. Problem yes. But it can be dealt with.

Here are some answers:

1. Let’s raise taxes on the wealthy. We do have a revenue crisis. Collection­s are at the lowest levels of GDP since the 1950s.

2. Let’s raise the cap on Social Security.

3. Let’s pass Medicare for All. Or at least a genuinely competitiv­e public option.

4. Let’s renegotiat­e all trade agreements

5. Let’s pass a genuine stimulus bill.

6. Let’s extend unemployme­nt benefits.

7. Let’s grant aid to states to halt pubic sector layoffs.

Any plan that does not address these issues is politicall­y driven and ideologica­lly fossilized­. Moreover, there is little doubt that none of these theatrics would have occurred had a Republican been in the White House.

The Republicans have proposed a piece of trash known as the Ryan Plan. The Corporate Media Propaganda Machine has called it courageous. In reality, it is sheer economic pornography.

We have a revenue crisis. The revenue to GDP ratio is lower than it has been since the 1950s. Tax cuts are redistributing wealth upwards. Reagan’s trickle down morphed almost immediately into gush up.

It is clear to anyone whose mind has not become hopelessly fossilized by ideology that excessive tax cuts are destroying the entire U S economy.

We have a revenue crisis.

Let’s raise taxes on the wealthy.


Most of the $14.5 trillion debt was accumulated under Republican presidents, in many cases supported by Republican majorities in one or both Houses of Congress and by right wing Democrats.

File:Obama at Darfur rally 4.JPG

If Democrats can’t dump this guy in 2012 they need to put as much distance between him and themselves before he destroys the party altogether.

The debt has risen under Obama. But much of it has accumulated as a result of sharp revenue declines due to high unemployment and the continuation of tax cuts for the wealthy. Also contributing to the deficit are Obama’s continuation of the Bush wars; a huge and unnecessary war budget; and Wall Street thievery and the subsequent taxpayer bailout.

An inadequate stimulus – that included worthless tax cuts; needed aid to the states; and some money for job creation – was also a factor.


Republicans are responsible for nearly 75% of the total debt. Granted Democratic Congresses were involved in the accumulation. But Republican presidents repeatedly signed off on the debt without so much as a whimper from fellow Republicans.

We are actually in the midst of a revenue crisis. Tax collections as a percent of GDP are at their lowest levels since the 1950s.

Let’s raise taxes on the wealthy.


Republicans are largely responsible for the deficit. The budget was headed in the direction of long term balance when Clinton left office. The deficit was $10.5 trillion when Bush exited. We must all be tired of hearing that Republicans voted to raise the debt ceiling 7 times under Bush – with hardly a care in the world.

The current stand off by the GOP is hypocritical and crassly political as past actions clearly reveal.

They remain intransigent primarily due to the expectation that Obama will fold as he has done routinely in the past. In this case, though the Republicans are not simply facing down Obama. They are holding the entire nation hostage.

They are waiting until Obama surrenders and offers cuts to the social safety net without making even the slightest concession. Foolishly, Obama has jeopardized his presidency by offering cuts anathema to his base without an agreement in hand.

It remains to be seen how Obama’s offer of safety net cuts will play in Tampa-St. Pete; or Peoria for that matter.


Greece said to at 130/100 debt to GDP. Japan 220/100. Italy 120/100. Japan’s economy is doing as well as can be expected; better than the U S economy. And the Japanese are still borrowing at record low interest rates.

U S revenue was 6% of GDP in 1950; 1% today. The U S is beset by a devastating revenue crisis. Unless revenue increases, full recovery may take a decade if it occurs at all.

Let’s raise taxes on the wealthy.


There is a backlash coming no doubt. Voters are beginning to understand that the only agenda Republicans have is to advance the decades old vendetta against the social safety net.

Unfortunately, we have in the White House a president who seems to share that vendetta.

No one can question any longer that the man is a DINO and hopefully liberals are coming around to the realization that it is better to have a Republican president that a right wing Democrat.

Why? Democrats in Congress would be more likely to resist the agenda of a right wing Republican rather than supinely accommodate the policies of the DINO as they are now doing.

Although they are still Democrats aren’t they?

If they had any gumption at all, the Dems would abandon this president in 2012. Put as much distance between him and themselves as they possibly can and as fast as they possibly can. In other words, dump this guy before he destroys the party altogether.

Anyone care to venture a guess how the president’s cuts will play in Tampa-St. Pete??? 


I will fulfill my obligation to vote as always. But in the future I refuse to vote for any candidate whose views I cannot support. I wasted two votes on Clinton and one on Obama – both men right wingers on economic issues – and I refuse to waste any more votes on the right wing of the so-called Democratic Party.

Obama lost the House in 2010 because of his duplicity on the health insurance issue. He engaged in backroom deals with the Pharma and Hospital industries and personally killed the public option. His deceit was exposed and he lost the election for the Democratic Party in the House.

Obama has been an ardent supporter of cuts to Social Security and Medicare. You’ve have only to refer to his rigged Cat Food Commission to substantia­te that accusation­. More recently he has put SS and Medicare cuts on the table in the pretend deficit “crisis” negotiatio­ns.

Moreover, while attending to the trumped up deficit issue, Obama has ignored the unemployme­nt crisis, the health insurance crisis and the revenue crisis (tax collection­s are at the lowest level of GDP since the 1950s).

Why? There’s an old mob saying: You gotta have the geetus. And that goes double in American politics. Obama intends to get his share. So far, so good.

About Barack Obama 2012

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost


The cuts the president is focusing on will impact largely on the social safety net.


The multimillionaire whose multis are about to increase dramatically. 

By putting millions of Americans on the chopping block Obama committed a political act of spectacula­r ineptitude no matter how you try to spin it. Eleven dimensiona­l chess?????  More like Tiddlywink­s.

The Republican­s will have a field day.

The sound bites are about to go into production and will hit the airwaves continuous­ly beginning next summer. “Obama wanted to cut Social Security and Medicare. The Republican­s turned him down.”

Obama could be crushed for this blatant misstep alone.

Real Democrats have to put distance between themselves and Obama or he will take down the party along with his presidency just as he did in 2010 with his duplicity on the public option.

Yes, Republican­s frame the debate just as they always do. But in this case Obama is their most ardent advocate. Perhaps he sees greatness in his legacy if he can tame the deficit “crisis”. But his advocacy has blinded him to the genuine crises of the day: Unemployme­nt, the health insurance crisis and the root of all this evil – the revenue crisis.

If no one on his staff pulled him back from offering the self-immol­ating cuts to the social programs, it means only one thing: The White House is unalterabl­y committed to cutting Social Security and Medicare. If Obama doesn’t do it this term, he will do it next should he be reelected.


Sadly, liberals are already beginning to rally around this man’s political corpse. Slaved to the Rahm Doctrine – that liberals have no place else to go so they can be discarded to be resurrected only on election day – the left wing of the party will do what it can to reverse what more and more seems like a lost cause.

However, progressives must consider alternatives. For example, if a Republican president is elected Democrats will have enormous incentive to stand fast against unreasonable, unwarranted and unjustified spending cuts and address the real crises of the day: Unemployment, health insurance and the root of it all – the revenue crisis.


If it was clear before it has to be perfectly clear now that Obama wanted to cut Social Security and Medicare from the day he was inaugurated His rigged Cat Food Commission showed the inclination of this president to cut. And now in spectacularly stupid fashion Obama has admitted for all the world to see that he advocates cuts to two of the nation’s most cherished programs.


A shadow of his former self. He should hang his head in shame.

Obama agrees wholeheartedly with the Republican myth that the country has a deficit “crisis”. Of course the “crisis” exists in the mind of the president. Republicans know it is a myth because they are the ones who created it.

I suspect that Obama from the very start saw the deficit as the overriding issue of the day and he determined to become the president who tamed it. Perhaps he saw this one issue as the factor that would determine his legacy, his greatness as a president. All presidents are driven by big egos. Obama seems to have one that is larger than most.

He therefore set out to cut the two major programs to garner support from the wealthy who hate and to establish an indelible mark of greatness to his presidency.

He has of course miscalculated badly. He will now be forever maligned as the president who sought to take the first steps to dismantle the programs. He not only agreed to put Social Security and Medicare on the chopping block; but he sought as well to put you and me and countless millions of Americans on the same chopping block.

It’s beginning to look like the so-called deficit “crisis” was an excuse to begin the dismantling of the two most popular programs in the U S today.

Obama should be ashamed of himself!

What’s the Matter with Liberals???

What’s the matter with Kansas??? The same thing that’s wrong with liberals.

File:Barack Obama calls Space Shuttle Atlantis crew 2009-05-20.jpg

Would you buy a used car from this man???

Kansans vote fundamentalist religious values and in the process slit their own economic throats.

Liberals vote progressive social values and slit their throats as well.

How can this be? Liberals voted overwhelming for Bill Clinton, a president who tended somewhat toward the left on social issues. On economic issues, however, Clinton was a right wing extremist. NAFTA alone convicts him of that accusation since he supported that rigged trade agreement despite protests from many of his most ardent supporters.

His wholesale abolition of the New Deal regulations – laws that separated investment and commercial banks – validate the accusation even more pointedly.

Yet liberals supported Clinton during his second term despite the travails of that period. And many still believe he is one of our better presidents regardless of the disastrous legislation he signed into law. Even today, knowing that Clinton wanted to cut Social Security and sent his chief of staff, the Southern landed aristocrat, Erskine Bowles on a mission to right winger Newt Gingrich, to discuss ways to slash the program, libeals defend his record. So what’s the matter with liberals?

An then there’s Obama, a decidedly right wing president on economic issues. Not the euphemistically centrist or moderate. But thoroughly right wing. If he goes much further right he’ll be approaching nut job status.

Here is the destruction he has wreaked so far. He’s seeking approval on three one sided trade agreements; extended tax cuts for the rich; signed a payroll tax cut and seems to want another one. The alarms should ring out here. Payroll tax cuts skim money from the Social Security savings account, money that will eventually have to be replaced from general revenue, leaving an opening for SS haters to attack the fund as contributing to the deficit.

Did I mention that Obama agreed to cuts in SS, Medicare and Medicaid? No. Well, as we all know by now he did.

What could be farther to the right than those policies? This man on economic issues is a verifiable right wing extremist.

And yet liberals are already making excuses to vote for him in 2012. The Republicans are worse they say. Worse than what? Conditions are already worse under Obama.

Yes. He does tack left on social issues but in some cases he had to be pushed hard. So if liberals support Obama because of social issues and Kansans support conservatives because of social issues although from opposite ends of the spectrum, we have to ask the question: What’s the matter with liberals???

Here’s one other excuse for voting for Obama. One that I even applied to myself. He will appoint justices to the Supreme Court who lean left. Well, not so fast. If he does win a second term, and that likelihood is appearing less likely with every passing day, he would no longer be constrained by reelection worries. He is therefore free to go either way. And given his recent right wing behavior he could very well see fit to nominate corporate friendly appointees to the Court.

What other excuses are left to support Obama? I’m sure liberals can uncover them. But it begs the question: What’s the matter with liberals???