Motley Moose – Archive

By: Inoljt, http://mypolitikal.com/

Summer is in full swing, which means that Hollywood has come out with the usual set of summer blockbusters. This year’s summer movies – from Inception to Despicable Me – have generally been good quality, well-done things. Indeed, the film Inception may become one of the great classics of movie fame.

Then there was The Last Airbender, by M. Night Shyamalan – a movie which may earn the title as the worst movie this year. From its inception (pardon the pun) to its sorry release, Airbender has been dogged in the wake of controversial casting decisions. The graphic below neatly summarizes the controversy:

More below.

Hey fellow Moosers, I need some help.  I have a friend that has a blog, he’s basically a revolutionary, all talk, but basically a revolutionary.  He is pretty smart and he has a history degree.

So, I finally got him to come off the ledge and think about some policy.  Of course, him being him, it’s pretty extreme.

Here a link to his blog.  http://whydontyourelax.blogspo…

What I was hoping for is that some of my Mooser friends can help me ease into this policy idea formation thing he’s trying.  I’m going to copy and paste the blog with the few comments that are made so far.  

If you feel so inclined, maybe you can comment on his blog to help him out, or if you don’t want to do that, maybe you can comment here and I’ll paste it over there.

So, what do you think?  Can you help me ease this guy into the fight?

As many of you know I have a bet with another Moose on who will be the Republican nominee for President.  I have Pawlenty while the other Moose (I’ll let someone else “out” the poor deluded soul) has Huckabee.  The field, official and otherwise, might be a bit crowded although only Romney, Pawlenty, and Santorum (?!) have officially formed exploratory committees.

But we all know who has been sucking the air out of the GOP room lately ~ The Donald.

In 2006, then Senator Barack Obama voted against raising the debt ceiling. At the time, he said this:

The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies.

Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better

In 2007 and in 2008, when the Senate voted to increase the limit by $850 billion and $800 billion respectively, Senator Obama did not even bother to vote. He now probably wishes he hadn’t voted on the issue in 2006. Now, of course, the President is singing a different tune.

In an interview to be aired by ABC News, President Obama has admitted that politics drove his thinking in 2006 when he voted against raising the debt limit. “That was just an example of a new senator making what is a political vote as opposed to doing what was important for the country,” Obama said, “I’m the first one to acknowledge it.”

Obama said he now understands why Republicans are concerned about voting to raise the debt limit, characterizing it as a “lousy vote.” He continued, “Nobody likes to be tagged as having increased the debt limit for the United States by a trillion dollars.”

The President added if Senators could see what he sees as President, they wouldn’t vote against raising the limit. “As President, you start realizing…we can’t play around with this stuff. This is the full faith [and] credit of the United States.”

The House and Senate passed the compromise legislation to finance the Federal government for the balance FY 2011, with 59 House Republicans breaking ranks to vote against the deal. The overall vote in the House was 260-167. Eighty-one Democrats gave House Speaker John Boehner the votes needed for the bill’s passage.

In the Senate, the vote was 81-19, with dissenting votes mostly coming from more conservative Republicans. In the Senate, 48 Democrats, 32 Republicans and independent Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut voted in favor.

Thank God. Finally. Having come to office with a promise of healing divisions, and being faced with an obstructionist opposition veering increasingly to the zero tax anarchy of the Libertarian Right, your President finally came clean. No he isn’t a corporate tool. (Hell, if he was, wouldn’t he have taken those Wall St job offers rather than a meagre community organisers job?). Yes, he went there, and picked on that 1% which Joseph Steiglitz has so graphically depicted as enriching themselves in the last two decades. For those who haven’t read it: here’s his opening premise:

It’s no use pretending that what has obviously happened has not in fact happened. The upper 1 percent of Americans are now taking in nearly a quarter of the nation’s income every year. In terms of wealth rather than income, the top 1 percent control 40 percent. Their lot in life has improved considerably. Twenty-five years ago, the corresponding figures were 12 percent and 33 percent. One response might be to celebrate the ingenuity and drive that brought good fortune to these people, and to contend that a rising tide lifts all boats. That response would be misguided.

While the top 1 percent have seen their incomes rise 18 percent over the past decade, those in the middle have actually seen their incomes fall. For men with only high-school degrees, the decline has been precipitous-12 percent in the last quarter-century alone. All the growth in recent decades-and more-has gone to those at the top. In terms of income equality, America lags behind any country in the old, ossified Europe that President George W. Bush used to deride. Among our closest counterparts are Russia with its oligarchs and Iran. While many of the old centers of inequality in Latin America, such as Brazil, have been striving in recent years, rather successfully, to improve the plight of the poor and reduce gaps in income, America has allowed inequality to grow.

My emphases

While some think liberals like me are only ever angry at the choices the president has made, are not supportive of him,  are PUMAs or whatever, I want to dispel that notion.

I do not agree with the president’s education choices/ideology and will fight him and Duncan on that always.  But when he inspires me, I speak up. I am not afraid to speak out when I support what the president says/does, anymore than when I do not agree or support his choices.

I truly believe ALL OF US have an obligation to speak out and influence our fellow citizens, our legislators, and colleagues.  I have posted this on FB, knowing some of my friends and relatives are extremely right.  Some get very angry at me.  Some believe it is wrong to “speak publicly about politics with family and friends.”  Not me. I believe it is a moral obligation to speak out.

Here is my note on FB.

It’s well-known that some southerners still refer to the US Civil War as “The War of Northern Aggression.”  It’s an odd rhetorical trick, given that 150 years ago today some South Carolinians fired on Fort Sumpter, manned by Federal troops, and sparked the armed conflict that would claim over 600,000 lives.  Some southerners have tried to read this conflict as more about “states’ rights” than slavery.  

This effort is as old as the history of the conflict itself.  In his inaugural address as President of the CSA, Jefferson Davis avoids even alluding to slavery, suggesting that his movement knew its primary rationale for secession was awfully difficult to defend, though others tried with passion.

By: Inoljt, http://mypolitikal.com/

In the past few decades, the phenomenon of globalization has swept through the world. The world is more open and interconnected than any other time throughout history. Proponents of globalization argue that its effects have lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty, from places as diverse as China to India to South America. Opponents argue that globalization and free trade have led to rising inequality, damage to the environment, and jobs lost for millions of American workers.

Whatever the truth, globalization appears unstoppable. The greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression has barely dented the network; only another world war could truly undo its effects.

The World Cup offers a good illustration of globalization.

More below.