Well looks like the GOPers were right.
Obama is a sellout and Change means nothing in the face of corporations.
He lied about the Public Option and showed he has no guts whatsoever when it comes to fighting for the American People.
Stop asking me for donations and to participate--its over until Im proved wrong.
Now its time to attack the Democrats and the Republicans since they are the same corrupt sellouts.
Youre letting Retards and Creeps funded by corporations kill the hopes of the American people--there is no reform with a Public Option.
Goodbye and I hope this whole thing fails miserably.
Why is it the end of the summer and we dont have half of the administrations appointees in place?
Does the phrase "Recess Appointees" ring a bell?
All of these excuses will mean nothing in 2010 and 2012. The Health Care Scam to payoff big business with our money is unforgiveable and dispicable.
Why is the Obama administration so weak and cowardly?
As a former Chicago resident, this is embarrassing that the President uses Chicago to express how tough he is but gets nothing done.
How much do I have to donate for Obama to grow a pair and start cracking skulls?
Bipartisanship only works when youre running the show and are dominant over one's enemies.
Otherwise its just weakness.
Dear White House,
Im sick and tired of people running down the United States Government.
Did Wal-Mat put a man on the moon? Did GE win WWI? Did McDonald's defeat Hitler? Did Time Warner bring the country back after the Great Depression?
No, it was the US Government. Everything we did as a nation is generally handled by the Government and people who DO THE JOBS and its time to remind people of this.
Humanize the face of government, remind people that government is people doing a job in order to help their nation--this myth of the evil government is ridiculous and part of the reason the WH is losing this fight.
Im veteran and government employee in the Army Reserves--watching idiots and Rubes run down the "government" is infuriating and untrue.
Stop complaining about Progressives going after Blue Dogs and break their backs until they make the Public Option happen.
60 Votes means "No Excuses."
Stop pretending we're friends and one big happy family and produce real results or we will fix this our way by not supporting the administration.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPOGzBJfQSo
Top economists and United Nations leaders are working on a "Green New Deal" to create millions of jobs, revive the world economy, slash poverty and avert environmental disaster, as the financial markets plunge into their deepest crisis since the Great Depression.
The ambitious plan – the start of which will be formally launched in London next week - will call on world leaders, including the new US President, to promote a massive redirection of investment away from the speculation that has caused the bursting “financial and housing bubbles” and into job-creating programmes to restore the natural systems that underpin the world economy.
It aims to convince them that, far from restricting growth, healing the global environment will be a desperately -needed driving force behind it.
The Green Economy Initiative - which will be spearheaded by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), headquartered here, and is already being backed by governments – draws its inspiration from Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal, which ended the 1930s depression and helped set up the world economy for the unprecedented growth of the second half of the 20th century.
It, too, envisages basing recovery on providing work for the poor, as well as reform of financial practices, after a crash brought on by unregulated excesses of the free market and the banking system.
The new multimillion dollar initiative – which is being already funded by the German and Norwegian Governments and the European Commission – arises out of a study commissioned by world leaders at the 2006 G8 summit into the economic value of ecosystems. It argues that the world is caught up in not one, but three interlinked crises, with the food and fuel crunches accompanying and intensifying the financial one.
Soaring prices of grain and oil, it stresses, have stemmed from outdated economic priorities that have concentrated on short term exploitation of the world's resources, without considering how they can be used to sustain prosperity in the long term. Over the last quarter of a century, says UNEP, world growth has doubled, but 60 per cent of the natural resources that provide food, water, energy and clean air have been seriously degraded.
Achim Steiner, UNEP's Executive Director, adds that new research shows that every year, for example the felling of forests deprives the world of over $2.5 trillion worth of such services in supplying water, generating rainfall, stopping soil erosion, cleaning the air and reducing global warming . By comparison, he points out, the global financial crisis is so far estimated to have cost the world the smaller one-off sum of $1.5 trillion.
“We are pushing, if not pushing past, the limits of what the planet can sustain,” he says. “If we go on as we are today’s crisis will seem mild indeed compared to the crises of tomorrow”.
Switching direction and concentrating on 'green growth', he says, will not only prevent such catastrophes, but rescue the world's finances. “The new, green economy would provide a new engine of growth, putting the world on the road to prosperity again. This is about growing the world economy in a more intelligent, sustainable way.
“The 20th century economy, now in such crisis, was driven by financial capital. The 21st century one is going to have to be based on developing the world's natural capital to provide the lasting jobs and wealth that are needed, particularly for the poorest people on the planet”
He says for example, that it makes more sense to invest in preserving forests, peatlands and soils, which naturally absorb carbon dioxide, than destroying them and then developing expensive technology to do the job.
He points out that the world market for environmental goods and service already stands at $1.3 trillion and is expected to double over the next 12 years even on present trends, and adds. “There is an enormous opportunity to ride on this increasing global demand for environmental improvement and turn it into the driver of economic growth, job creation and poverty reduction that is now so desperately needed. And in some places it is already beginning to happen.”
Mr Steiner will launch the initiative in London a week on Wednesday, October 22nd, with the announcement of three projects, concentrating on how investing in the world's natural systems, in renewable energy and in other green technologies would stimulate growth and provide jobs, and giving examples of where it is already taking place.
He will describe, for example, how Mexico is now employing 1.5 million people to plant and manage forests, how China has created the world's biggest solar energy industries from scratch in just a few years, and how Germany has leapt from being a laggard to a leader in renewable energy by giving people attractive incentives to install it in their home.
Pavan Sukhdev, the chair of Deutschbank's Global Market Centre, who is leading the initiative, says: “. Hundreds of millions of jobs can be created, there is no question that traditional industries like steel and cars cannot provide them. But this is a really huge business opportunity.”
Obama has to bring this up at the next debate.
EADS loses USD 35 billion US Air Force contract it had won
John McCain’s Dirty Little Tanker Secrets
Americans need to understand the tremendous importance of the Air Force tanker contract to our national security and our economy. Of equal importance is the politics that went on behind the scenes. One of the key players, not only in this contract, but throughout the history of the Air Force’s need for a new refueling tanker, has been John McCain, primarily as a long-standing member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and his own personal military experience.
Here are some key points that underscore how critical this contract is to our future as a nation:
KC-X tankers will provide increased aircraft availability, more adaptable technology, and greater overall capability than the current inventory of KC-135E tankers they will replace. Enhancements to every aspect of aircraft operation will provide the Joint warfighter with more flexible employment options. It is imperative that we begin a program of smart, steady reinvestment in a new tanker – coupled with measured, timely retirements of the oldest, least capable tankers. Recapitalizing our tankers will ensure the viability of this vital national capability. Tankers make the Air Bridge possible and are essential to the success of joint and coalition military operations. Tankers are critical to the deployment and employment of joint combat power, and are crucial to rapid response to combat and humanitarian relief operations. - Lt Gen Carrol H. Chandler- Source: April Report to the Senate Armed Services Committee 4/26/2007
In early 2008, The long awaited Air Force Contract for the Armed Forced next generation KC-X refueling tanker was decided. The two bidders on the project were Boeing, a U.S. based company, and Northrop-Grummond, owned by Airbus, which in turn is owned by EADS (European Air Defense and Space administration). The contract was rewarded to Airbus, much to the surprise of Boeing, the U.S. congress, the media, and the nation in general.
Boeing soon filed an appeal with The Government Accounting Office (GAO), which oversees the legal ramifications and possible violations of government contract procedures, and within days found seven specific major problems with the method in which the Air Force awarded the contract.
What the GAO report didn’t include were the national security issues involved with having top-secret documents in the hands of foriegn governments. This is especially troublesome when coupled with the revelation (prior to the Iraq War) that France and Germany were secretly circumventing the Oil for Food program and that many high level officials were recieving money bribes directly from Saddam Hussein. Additionally, France and Germany have provided parts and engineering prowess in the development of nuclear programs in North Korea, pre-war Iraq, Iran, and Syria. These facts beg the question: Is it really a good idea from a national security standpoint to trust this type of information to countries that have aided and abetted our enemies, even to the point of ignoring U.N. mandates and sanctions?
Additionally, Airbus is currently under investigation for being subsidized by European Governments. The subsidies are the subject of a complaint that the United States filed with the World Trade Organization in 2004. European governments provided illegal subsidies to design and develop aircraft, including preferential loans, debt relief and research and development grants. The offshoot of these subsidies allowed Airbus to offer their planes at a cost which would not have been profitable for them otherwise, giving them an unfair advantage when bidding on new military and commercial contracts.
So, what does all this have to do with McCain? The facts, taken as a whole, are mind-boggling.
In 2004, Boeing offered the United States Government the opportunity to lease new tankers at a cost of 20 billion dollars…15 billion below the 35 billion of the new contract. Additionally, under the lease program, Boeing would have been responsible for repairs and maintenance, which would have saved the Armed Forces additional cost and effort.
Due to an investigation of this offer, a scandal was uncovered involving an offer for a high-paying job at Boeing to one of the top Air Force staff members involved in recommending this program. The two Boeing executives involved in the scandal were subsequently fired and are now serving time in jail, but the plan was abandoned without any real consideration as to whether or not it still had merit. McCain still expresses great pride in having a “central role” in defeating that proposal, which would have, by now, eased the burden caused by our badly aged tanker fleet (an issue which the Air Force is now calling “critical” as a defense to reopening the bidding process which the GAO report is encouraging them to do), as well as saving billions of dollars of taxpayer money over the current tanker contract.
The reality is that McCain had nothing to do with uncovering this scandal. The real hero was Ronald Garant, Director, Investment, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, who brought the inflated costs by Boeing to the attention of government investigators. McCain’s involvement? He signed a letter asking for a full investigation after the lease deal was already rejected. (Report No. OIG-2004-171). <!– @page { size: 8.5in 11in; margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } –>
And during the course of the current bidding contract itself, in which the Air Force worked with both Boeing and Airbus/Northrop-Grumman, McCain, as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee (which is charged with overseeing government defense contracts), wrote two advisory letters to Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon Englund in September 2006 in which he encouraged them to strike the consideration of Airbus’ Subsidy investigation by the WTO from contract consideration, and the impact it would have on the American economy AND American jobs:
“I am concerned that if the Air Force proceeds down its chosen path regarding the W.T.O. issue, the Air Force will risk eliminating competition before bids are submitted,” Mr. McCain wrote. “I respectfully suggest that Air Force remove any W.T.O. element from its procurement evaluation.”
President Bush also urged the same thing. It seems that neither one of them took the time to think of the full economic implications either.
If all this weren’t bad enough, it turns out that many of McCain’s former and current campaign staffers were lobbyists for… EADS, Airbus’ parent company, which McCain dismisses as mere coincidence. And we aren’t talking low-level positions either:
Mr. McCain’s campaign co-chairman, former Representative Thomas Loeffler, a Texas Republican, also runs a lobbying firm, the Loeffler Group, which earned $220,000 working for EADS in 2007. Mr. Loeffler was the McCain campaign national finance chairman when his firm was hired to lobby for EADS.“Two other Loeffler executives who were registered to lobby for EADS are now top campaign advisers for Mr. McCain: Susan Nelson, the finance director, and William L. Ball III, the former Navy secretary. Ms. Nelson and Mr. Ball left the lobbying firm to join the campaign.Another major money raiser for Mr. McCain, Wayne Berman, who was named vice chairman of the campaign last year, also worked for EADS through another lobbying firm, Ogilvy Government Relations, where he is a partner. Ogilvy earned $240,000 from EADS in 2007.Also supporting Mr. McCain and lobbying on behalf of EADS was Kirk Blalock, a national chairman of Young Professionals for McCain and a former aide to President Bush. Mr. Blalock’s lobbying firm, Fierce, Isakowitz & Blalock, earned $320,000 from EADS in 2007, according to disclosure forms required by Congress.” Source: The New York Times
Mr. McCain’s campaign co-chairman, former Representative Thomas Loeffler, a Texas Republican, also runs a lobbying firm, the Loeffler Group, which earned $220,000 working for EADS in 2007. Mr. Loeffler was the McCain campaign national finance chairman when his firm was hired to lobby for EADS.
“Two other Loeffler executives who were registered to lobby for EADS are now top campaign advisers for Mr. McCain: Susan Nelson, the finance director, and William L. Ball III, the former Navy secretary. Ms. Nelson and Mr. Ball left the lobbying firm to join the campaign.
Another major money raiser for Mr. McCain, Wayne Berman, who was named vice chairman of the campaign last year, also worked for EADS through another lobbying firm, Ogilvy Government Relations, where he is a partner. Ogilvy earned $240,000 from EADS in 2007.
Also supporting Mr. McCain and lobbying on behalf of EADS was Kirk Blalock, a national chairman of Young Professionals for McCain and a former aide to President Bush. Mr. Blalock’s lobbying firm, Fierce, Isakowitz & Blalock, earned $320,000 from EADS in 2007, according to disclosure forms required by Congress.” Source: The New York Times
In response to scrutiny by Congress, McCain’s response was, “I had nothing to do with the contract except to insist in writing on several occasions as this process went forward that it be fair and open and transparent.”
If this response is predicated as a defense, does it not also show a deriliction of duty to continue to oversee the bidding process to its completion, which is the task of the very Senate Armed Services Committe of which he is a member? Would he not be the ideal candidate, considering his vast military experience?
What really calls McCain’s response into question is his own history, the very same fact that he holds forth as a shining moment of his political acumen: his central involvement in the Boeing Tanker lease deal of 2004. Would he not be as actively involved in such a similar deal now?
What wraps up the stench of this whole debacle is the GAO’s response to Boeing’s challenge to the rewardiing of the contract:
1. The Air Force, in making the award decision, did not assess the relative merits of the proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria identified in the solicitation, which provided for a relative order of importance for the various technical requirements. The agency also did not take into account the fact that Boeing offered to satisfy more non-mandatory technical “requirements” than Northrop Grumman, even though the solicitation expressly requested offerors to satisfy as many of these technical “requirements” as possible.2. The Air Force’s use as a key discriminator that Northrop Grumman proposed to exceed a key performance parameter objective relating to aerial refueling to a greater degree than Boeing violated the solicitation’s evaluation provision that “no consideration will be provided for exceeding [key performance parameter] objectives.”3. The protest record did not demonstrate the reasonableness of the Air Force’s determination that Northrop Grumman’s proposed aerial refueling tanker could refuel all current Air Force fixed-wing tanker-compatible receiver aircraft in accordance with current Air Force procedures, as required by the solicitation.4. The Air Force conducted misleading and unequal discussions with Boeing, by informing Boeing that it had fully satisfied a key performance parameter objective relating to operational utility, but later determined that Boeing had only partially met this objective, without advising Boeing of this change in the agency’s assessment and while continuing to conduct discussions with Northrop Grumman relating to its satisfaction of the same key performance parameter objective.5. The Air Force unreasonably determined that Northrop Grumman’s refusal to agree to a specific solicitation requirement that it plan and support the agency to achieve initial organic depot-level maintenance within 2 years after delivery of the first full-rate production aircraft was an “administrative oversight,” and improperly made award, despite this clear exception to a material solicitation requirement.6. The Air Force’s evaluation of military construction costs in calculating the offerors’ most probable life cycle costs for their proposed aircraft was unreasonable, where the agency during the protest conceded that it made a number of errors in evaluation that, when corrected, result in Boeing displacing Northrop Grumman as the offeror with the lowest most probable life cycle cost; where the evaluation did not account for the offerors’ specific proposals; and where the calculation of military construction costs based on a notional (hypothetical) plan was not reasonably supported.7. The Air Force improperly increased Boeing’s estimated non-recurring engineering costs in calculating that firm’s most probable life cycle costs to account for risk associated with Boeing’s failure to satisfactorily explain the basis for how it priced this cost element, where the agency had not found that the proposed costs for that element were unrealistically low. In addition, the Air Force’s use of a simulation model to determine Boeing’s probable non-recurring engineering costs was unreasonable, because the Air Force used as data inputs in the model the percentage of cost growth associated with weapons systems at an overall program level and there was no indication that these inputs would be a reliable predictor of anticipated growth in Boeing’s non-recurring engineering costs. Source: GAO Report
1. The Air Force, in making the award decision, did not assess the relative merits of the proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria identified in the solicitation, which provided for a relative order of importance for the various technical requirements. The agency also did not take into account the fact that Boeing offered to satisfy more non-mandatory technical “requirements” than Northrop Grumman, even though the solicitation expressly requested offerors to satisfy as many of these technical “requirements” as possible.
2. The Air Force’s use as a key discriminator that Northrop Grumman proposed to exceed a key performance parameter objective relating to aerial refueling to a greater degree than Boeing violated the solicitation’s evaluation provision that “no consideration will be provided for exceeding [key performance parameter] objectives.”
3. The protest record did not demonstrate the reasonableness of the Air Force’s determination that Northrop Grumman’s proposed aerial refueling tanker could refuel all current Air Force fixed-wing tanker-compatible receiver aircraft in accordance with current Air Force procedures, as required by the solicitation.
4. The Air Force conducted misleading and unequal discussions with Boeing, by informing Boeing that it had fully satisfied a key performance parameter objective relating to operational utility, but later determined that Boeing had only partially met this objective, without advising Boeing of this change in the agency’s assessment and while continuing to conduct discussions with Northrop Grumman relating to its satisfaction of the same key performance parameter objective.
5. The Air Force unreasonably determined that Northrop Grumman’s refusal to agree to a specific solicitation requirement that it plan and support the agency to achieve initial organic depot-level maintenance within 2 years after delivery of the first full-rate production aircraft was an “administrative oversight,” and improperly made award, despite this clear exception to a material solicitation requirement.
6. The Air Force’s evaluation of military construction costs in calculating the offerors’ most probable life cycle costs for their proposed aircraft was unreasonable, where the agency during the protest conceded that it made a number of errors in evaluation that, when corrected, result in Boeing displacing Northrop Grumman as the offeror with the lowest most probable life cycle cost; where the evaluation did not account for the offerors’ specific proposals; and where the calculation of military construction costs based on a notional (hypothetical) plan was not reasonably supported.
7. The Air Force improperly increased Boeing’s estimated non-recurring engineering costs in calculating that firm’s most probable life cycle costs to account for risk associated with Boeing’s failure to satisfactorily explain the basis for how it priced this cost element, where the agency had not found that the proposed costs for that element were unrealistically low. In addition, the Air Force’s use of a simulation model to determine Boeing’s probable non-recurring engineering costs was unreasonable, because the Air Force used as data inputs in the model the percentage of cost growth associated with weapons systems at an overall program level and there was no indication that these inputs would be a reliable predictor of anticipated growth in Boeing’s non-recurring engineering costs. Source: GAO Report
Pretty damning, but Point Number 4 is especially troubling. Who encouraged the Air Force to intentionally mislead Boeing, so that Boeing’s final proposal would fail?
Any Guesses? I have one…
The bottom line is this. As any Washington insider will tell you, there ARE NO COINCIDENCES. That John McCain was involved with this contract is on the record. If you believe his statements, then he has clearly demonstrated a lack of sensibility and oversight, which does not bode well for a President. If he was involved on a deeper level, which I personally believe given the facts, then the presentation of himself on the campaign trail as the best Guardian of National Security and Champion of the American Working Class rings a very sour note.
And now, we have the Pentagon canceling the initial contract in order to hand it off to the next administration… which, if the military testimony is to be believed, will leave us in an even more precarious position militarily, as we’re forced to continue to use outdated tankers. This does not make us safer, it undermines our national security, puts our pilots at risk, and presents our military with challenges they shouldn’t have to face.
And this all happened under McCain’s watch.
We all know its stupid nonsense, but the Rubes and Dopes are easily distracted.
This article would make a great ad. Better yet, put this man on TV and let him explain it to the American people.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003873017
Mill Valley, Calif., Oct. 8, 2008
Im losing faith again.
This isnt the time for a mumble-mouthed qiuet, cool speech--this is the time to be Partisan and DESTROY the Republicans.
The only time the Republicans ask for bipartisanship is when they screw up. How many times do we have to watch this happen and watch the Democrats FOLD again and again.
Obama has no heart. I dont care how smart he is, this isnt an intelligence competition--this is a street fight. Obama has to connect with the people beyond the pundits and down to the average person.
Yes he has a plan--thats great. Meaningless but great.
Obama has to get mad, he has to get in the streets and tell people that he is going to be a leader and not give a boring speech.
WAKE UP!! GET MAD! FIGHT!
McCain is on record for deregulation--HAMMER HIM WITH IT!
DO NOT give Paulson $700 billion--make him explain WHY the economy will collapse and how that collapse will work. He cant do it. Make him cry, make him admit hes incompetant during the hearings. Why take his word on this?
Ask Paulson why this became so important when Goldmann Sachs (the same place he has a $500 million Blind Trust) was about to fold.
Its a ruse--the Republicans will let the Dems take the lead and give away $One Trillion and then say "this is what happens: Big Govt, Tax and Spend Libs. See?! We told you..."
MAKE THE REPUBLICANS ACCOUNTABLE--DO NOT TAKE THE BLAME ALONE. MAKE SURE THAT IT ONLY PASSES WITH THE REPUBLCIANS FULL SUPPORT. YOU THINK PEOPLE WILL REMEMBER WHY THE DEMS SPENT A TRILLION DOLLARS AFTER THE FACT?
IF THE BAILOUT IS SO IMPORTANT HOW CAN THEY INSIST ON GOLDEN PARACHUTES?! ITS A LIE!! GIVE THEM NOTHING AND LET THEM ROT! THEY CANT EVEN SAY HOW THE MARKETS WILL CRASH BUT WE SHOULD TRUST THEM?!
THIS IS A SCAM--OBAMA NEEDS TO TAKE THE LEAD AND BE A LEADER--stop playing it cool--youre not that smart or cool, and youre not in the
This is the fork in the road between Victory and Excuses. Stop making jokes on the stump and start breathing fire. Fake it if you have to, but do more and try harder.
Stop asking me for money--I dont give it to cowards who cant stand up for the people.
This is part of the message the Democrats need to hammer home and let people know about.
This is why we need independent groups who support Democrats and a nationwide Green Economy to mirror the growth of the Clinton Era (didnt he also rasise taxes and balance the budget?) with the Dot Com bubble--it fits right in with the tax rate of the Clinton Era.
DEMOCRATS UNITED going back to what was successful for the entire country ("Country First!").
http://www.workdayminnesota.org/index.php?news_6_3789
A new report, "Green Recovery: A Program to Create Good Jobs and Start Building a Low-Carbon Economy," says investing green will yield two million jobs in just two years. In Duluth traffic has been slowed often recently by huge tractor/trailers carrying windmill parts and other equipment designed to take advantage of alternative energy sources. Lay-down yards around the harbor are full of windmill parts in fact. At a press conference at the Duluth Seaway Port Authority Sept. 9, John Doberstein of the Blue Green Alliance said the Green Economic Recovery Program will yield over 37,000 new jobs in Minnesota if political leadership follows the lead of governors in Pennsylvania, Colorado, and other states. Norm Voorhees speaks at a news conference on green jobs at the Duluth port.Norm Voorhees, a Market Development Representative for Ironworkers Local 512, says their membership is seeing "a lot of man hours of work from erecting windmills and environmental upgrades." He said Ironworkers nationwide are experiencing the benefits. "Responsible development is where a lot of economic growth is at today," Voorhees said at the press conference. "But it's not just all new green technology, a lot of it is from our long time partners who have made this area what it is today." He pointed to all the environmental improvements to air and water quality that have been made by retrofitting places like Murphy Oil, Sappi, Georgia Pacific, the mines, power plants, and many other long time facilities. "All those places are complying to environmental regulations that make this a better region to live and work in," said Voorhees. "All our construction unions have benefited from those jobs, as have the the workers at those plants, and the general public." Christopher LaForge came to the press conference as the newest member of IBEW Local 242. The owner of Port Wing-based Great Northern Solar, LaForge said his work has started to bring him into more contact with union contractors in the area and he decided it was only right that he be union himself. He does training for contractors' employees who install the solar units he sells. "The future is now, and it demands bold action," LaForge said. "There is a lot of good work for labor and unions, and we have the educated workforce to bring this type of manufacturing home to Duluth." LaForge and Spencer Roth of Environment Minnesota both said political leadership must be pressured by the public to continue moving towards energy efficiency and making America less reliable on foreign oil. LaForge said a green investment tax credit bill is currently being held up in the U.S. Senate. "We have a strong labor presence here and can create high quality union jobs, lower energy costs, while making less of a carbon footprint," said Roth, if we can get leadership to follow. "Green Recovery" was prepared by the Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst under commission by the Center for American Progress. The report shows that, in addition to creating 2 million jobs nationwide over two years, this $100 billion green economic recovery package would: • Create nearly four times more jobs than spending the same amount of money within the oil industry and 300,000 more jobs than a similar amount of spending directed toward household consumption. • Create roughly triple the number of good jobs—paying at least $16 dollars an hour—as spending the same amount of money within the oil industry. • Reduce the unemployment rate to 4.4 percent from 5.7 percent (calculated within the framework of U.S. labor market conditions in July 2008). • Bolster employment especially in construction and manufacturing. Construction em-ployment has fallen from 8 million to 7.2 million jobs over the past two years due to the housing bubble collapse. The Green Recovery program can, at the least, bring back these lost 800,000 construction jobs. The recovery program aims to boost private and public investment in six energy-efficiency and renewable energy strategies: retrofitting buildings to improve energy efficiency; expanding mass transit and freight rail; constructing "smart" electrical grid transmission systems; and increasing the production of wind power, solar power, and next-generation biofuels. The report shows the vast majority of the 2 million jobs would be in the same areas of employment that people already work in today, in every region and state of the country. The green recovery program investments would fund: • $50 billion for tax credits. This would assist private businesses and homeowners to finance both commercial and residential building retrofits, as well as investments in renewable energy systems. • $46 billion in direct government spending. This would support public building retrofits, the expansion of mass transit, freight rail and smart electrical grid systems, and new investments in renewable energy. • $4 billion for federal loan guarantees. This would underwrite private credit that is extended to finance building retrofits and investments in renewable energy. Larry Sillanpa edits The Labor World, Minnesota's oldest labor publication. Visit the Labor World website, www.laborworld.org
The Democrats have to maintain a stranglehold on the Green Economy Concepts.
Keep an eye on this and nip this in the bud.And while youre at it Congress take the power back and explain why Congress has oversight in this situation.
Get in front of this before it gets out of hand Democrats, and take control of the debate. Mention Reagan talking to Iran to hold the hostages.
Google Search: Obama Logan Act treason
You cannot continue to blow off these adds of McCain's.
Your leads are decreasing, because you dont ATTACK Obama.
Playing to soft-hearted tactics are not the way to victory. You know this.
Stop laying up and letting McCain throw endless puches--eventually they will stick.
Attack, attack, attack McCain in the smart intelligent ways Progressives have perfected--Good lord, theres TONS of McCain ammo to use.
Get the surrogates moving and say it loud--McCain equals Bush, and votes against the troops.
If the Republicans are allowed to serve three Consecutive terms after all theyve done because the Democrats are not responding to the polls and not fighting back...its over the country is lost.
Get back on the attack--this is soooo uninspiring.
Senate bill would restrict Bush from secret executive orders
Sen. Russ Feingold, shown above, and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse sponsored the bill as a response to an unreleased statement from the Justice Department Office of Legal Council that the President can alter or deviate from a previous executive order without public or Congressional knowledge.
Whitehouse quoted the department's opinion during a speech about the "second-rate piece of legislation" known as the FISA bill, or Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
"There is no constitutional requirement for a President to issue a new Executive order whenever he wishes to depart from the terms of a previous Executive order. Rather than violate an Executive order, the President has instead modified or waived it."
This means the President could extend his powers beyond the laws that restrict the executive branch without the public knowing.
In order to disallow the President from doing so, Feingold and Whitehouse created the Executive Order Integrity Act of 2008.
"No one disputes that a President can withdraw or revise an Executive Order at any time," Feingold said as he introduced the bill Thursday. "But abrogating a published Executive order without any public notice works a secret change in the law."
"Because the published Order stays on the books, it actively misleads Congress and the public as to what the law is," he said.
Feingold said the new bill would eliminate that problem by requiring a notice of any change within 30 days, though it "does not require the publication of any classified information."
"On rare occasions, national security can justify elected officials keeping some information secret," he said, "but it can never justify lying to the American people about what the law is. Maintaining two different sets of laws, one public and one secret, is just that -- deceiving the American people about what law applies to the government's conduct."
Feingold spoke out against the FISA bill earlier this month, trying to convince fellow congressmen that it would make it more difficult to hold the President "accountable."
Until the Barack Obama Campaign starts throwing elbows and taking the fight to McCain and get on the record to go after McCain, I refuse to sink my money into a campaign that doesnt have the balls to stand up and fight for the country.
You have the funds and you have the TRUTH on your side--stand up and get after McCain.
Put his voting record on blast, call him out, and get the Democrats out there making moves and making noise for Obama!
Nice guys finish last--this campaign is too smart to not know full well that this country is dumb enough to believe what they see on TV.
Obama if you lose this election, I cannot support you in 2012. You had your chances and you failed to step up and act like a man: When someone calls you out, you get after him and knock Old Man McCain back on his heels.
EDIT 8/1/08
Happy to hear about Obama's decision to address certain Presidential Orders. I might consider slipping him some cash.
How about some Cabinet Member suggestions if we cant get the VP?
Welcome to the top spot Obama, have you met my friend, Satire.
Lets move on.
This is about the money and the economy, we need to move forward.
Obama, youre not that impressive and your message is a no-brainer. I support you as my nominee, but you owe the American people more than a good time and aa few laughs at each speech (yes, this is unfair and doesnt reflect all your hardwork, but as the Politician, you still get the blame), youre not impressing me with policy and plans right now, so you need to get back on your A-Game.
The country needs a Economic Plan (The New Deal for the 21st Century)
We need an economic czar--you need your players vetted and ready to go, you need to have possible Cabinet members ready to go.
The Dems need to agressively set the tones, giving McCain more balls to juggle--force the concersations to follow Obama and the oves eh makes, not asking for comments about other things that are taking away news time from Obama's movement.
We need Primetime surrogates who can work fundraisers on the local levels in non-Primetime areas.
We need need more from you Obama, and I can tell you now, whatever you do, wont be enough in the eyes some--as a politician you represent ALL US politicians as the President, you need to set the bar and set the tones.
I like you Obama, but youre running to be a public servant, Youre here to help me and everyone else in the country.
Its too easy, put all this together and give the people what they want-a return to something that works.
The success of the Baby Boomers and their parents proves how well this concept works. The Right cannot defeat History
Reach out to T. Boone Pickens, and his Alternative Energy Plans...NOW!!!
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/0...native-energy/
