Perhaps the most revealing portion of Election Night 2010 coverage came when MSNBC pundits Chris Matthews and Lawrence O'Donnell asked one specific question that towered above all others.

The Republican right, the exclusive control mechanism of the party, had during the entire campaign leading up to Election Night coverage drummed over and over the point that if elected fiscal responsibility would be restored.  The era of high spending would end.

The Republicans were spurred on by the newest and most vocal element of their constituency, the Tea Party.  At scores of rallies held throughout America big government spenders were told that their days were numbered.  Tea Party members were, in the words of Peter Finch in the great seventies' hit film "Network", "mad as hell and were not going to take it anymore."

Two major Republican figures from the House of Representatives were asked the same question.  They were Tea Party favorites Michele Bachmann of Minnesota and forthcoming House Majority Leader Eric Cantor of Virginia.

concept of Website seo

Barack Obama has cited his current tax bill as an example that Democrats and Republicans can work together.

Of course they can.  This type of deal making was always available.  The current tax proposal is capitulation being packaged as compromise.  Republicans are always delighted to see capitulation.  

Only a Barack Obama would have the gall to stand before America and proclaim that outright surrender constitutes a grand triumph of the American political system.

Take your bow, Mr. Obama.  The top 1 percent of Americans possess better than 90 percent of the nation's assets.  More Americans are working longer hours for less pay.  When was the last time that the minimum wage was increased?  

"The time is always right to do what is right"~~ Martin Luther King, Jr

I just finished calling Congressman Jim McDermott, my representative in Seattle.  I expressed my strong opposition to President Obama's caving in to Republican blackmail in agreeing under the guise of "compromise" to providing an extension to the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy.

Progressives owe a debt of gratitude to Dan Bartlett for expressing the truth even if the intention was to boast about a "victory" that has been a tragic loss to the middle class and poor and a victory for the super privileged of American society.  

Bartlett was chortling over the Republicans having put one over on the Democrats when it came to the initial act whereby such irresponsible cuts would be imposed.  It was not done in a normal fashion through legislation but as an add-on and as such the cuts would thereby expire.

This was but phase one of the strategy.  The intent at that time was for those tax cuts for the top two percent of Americans to be extended.  This is certainly the present intention of Senate and House Republican leadership, spearheaded by Senator Mitch McConnell and Congressman and soon to be Speaker of the House John Boehner.

The reigning corporate plutocracy's game plan could be succinctly summarized by paraphrasing a famous song of yesteryear.

"Praise the Lord, pass the ammunition and give me my tax cuts!" is reflective of what passes for current day philosophy of the New World Order, neoconservative right inhabited by the likes of George W. Bush, Tea Partiers, Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, and Karl Rove.

How much better it would be for America as well as the rest of the world if the angry Boehner refrain regarding Obama's health care legislation of "Hell no, you can't!" and the angry frustration embodied in it represented an accurate assessment of where things really stand in current day America.

In the overall scheme of events the Obama campaign refrain that Boehner was mocking is far more indicative of how the New World Order neocons are faring than any kind of accurate prediction of where Obama's forthcoming administration would take America.

In the most up front admission yet that the 2001 deficit-ballooning tax cuts were a sop to the mega-rich but created a fiscal (plus political) time bomb, the former Communications director for the Bush presidency, Dan Bartlett, is gushing:

"The fact that  we were able to lay the trap does feel pretty good, to tell you the truth."

On the 10-year auto-expiration, he says, "We knew that, politically, once you get it into law, it becomes almost impossible to remove it."

"That's not a bad legacy."

In an interview with Howard Kurtz of the DailyBeast, chief of staff Andy Card concurred with Bush's communication chief, explaining that the non-permanent, sunsetting tax change allowed it to win passage without having to muster an impossibly high 60-vote threshold for approval. (It was approved in 2001 with 58 aye votes, and the Democrats didn't stop it by filibuster.)

So how can the Democrats pull out of the trap now?

This morning, Senate Republicans filibustered the bill that would continue tax cuts, except in full for millionaires.

The GOP senators aim to hold out for full tax cuts for the wealthiest, at an extra tack-on of $700B to the debt.

Former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich stated last week that, while a national unemployment figure of roughly 10 percent nationally is alarming enough, the figure is better than double that figure for those Americans without college degrees.

While America stands at a dangerous crossroad with a disparity between the super rich and the rest of Americans having reached the level at which revolutions occur, we see a situation where Rand Paul is elected to the senate in Kentucky, then promptly declares himself to be an advocate of the rich.  He states that they create jobs and as a result Americans should be kinder to them.

Paul's senior colleague from Kentucky, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, recently appeared on "Meet the Press" and needed to be schooled by the program's host, David Gregory, on what constitutes a tax increase.  McConnell posited the idea that if a tax cut that those Americans making over $250,000 per year and up is not extended that the result is a tax increase being imposed during a turbulent economic period.

Gregory refused to let McConnell off the hook.  He pointed out the difference between the lapse of a tax cut and a tax increase.  The removal of a tax cut, while increasing the tax burden of the payer, encompasses what a person would have been paying but for the lessened amount.  Hence, removing a tax cut means that a former decreased status has been removed and the obligation level that would have otherwise been payable is now in vogue.

Barack Obama as an Illinoisan who is also America's first African American president could be expected to be absorbed by Doris Kearns Goodwin's historical work on Lincoln, "Team of Rivals".

An impressive entry on Obama's student resume was serving as president of the Harvard Law Review.  In that situation he needed to assume a collegial posture and weigh positions on issues regarding potential articles.

Obama has carried the aforementioned instances into an unrealistic expectation that as president he can deal in a Lincolnesque or Harvard Law Review context with the likes of Senator Mitch McConnell and Congressman John Boehner.  The only way that historical significance has relevance is if there are enough common facts to establish viable comparison.

Republican Senate Minority Leader McConnell delivered a message after the recent midterm election that should have provided Obama with a strong enough indication to recognize that his grand objective of compromise in the national interest was no more than wishful thinking without practical merit.  

Many Bush critics make the mistake of underestimating him.  This is one area where he has surprised with his ability to take a presumably bottomed out status and bottom it some more.

Bush's latest return with the same brash cockiness that has been a staple item recalls the words of a professor of his at Harvard, where he pursued a master of business administration degree.  

What the professor found in Bush's behavior, which included coming to class equipped with chewing tobacco and spitting pieces of it into a cup, was not so much a fundamental deficiency of intelligence but a glaring absence of parental development.

His father, George H.W. Bush, was criticized for a spoiled patrician's manner.  Critics said that he resembled someone who had been born on third base and was convinced that he had hit a triple.

We still have the senate and the presidency, so let's focus on the future.

Back in the 1960s British Cosmologist Fred Hoyle, who coined the term 'Big Bang', wrote a series of papers theorizing that life on Earth (and perhaps elsewhere) began out in the seeming void of deep space. His peers thought he was delusional.

Until along came Lew Snyder, then of the National Radio Astronomy Observatory. He asserted that Hoyle had the right idea and that prebiotic molecules (molecules believed to be involved in the processes leading to the origin of life) could not only evolve in deep space, but could also be distributed throughout the universe enduring the unimaginable torment of interstellar travel.

Furthermore, he could prove it.

Seems that many compounds have a unique and identifiable radio-wave signature - something that can be detected with the use of radio telescopes.

With this method, they theorized, you could point radio telescopes at the cosmos and by measuring the radio-wave signatures you could determine the molecular compounds that exist in the targeted region. This would tell us if complex, organic and prebiotic compounds are created and endure in deep space.

Sure enough, in 1969 they discovered interstellar formaldehyde - a complex, prebioitc compound. Since then, astronomers have discovered more than 150 molecules in deep space. Most interesting of these found is acetonitrile, a molecule structurally similar to glycine - one of the building blocks of biological proteins.

All this is profoundly important as it sets the stage for validating a once-absurd theory - that life on Earth (and perhaps throughout the universe) may have been seeded from deep-space chemical reactions.

This cold-sounding theory of our origins clearly runs counter to cherished beliefs that we are God's children or that we have a special place in this universe. Such a possibility could prove profoundly unsettling to many to say the least.

But there is no worry here. Not because the possibility doesn't exist. It does. The reason not to worry is that people en masse tend to see only what is in front of them and only that which is most emotionally comfortable.

For most people, such things are far too arcane and intangible to seriously consider. What they see before them and what they've been taught growing up is all that they know and all that they care to know.

And that is the way it is with most things - with evolution, with global warming -- and so it is with ideology and politics.

Whatever is before us is all that there is. The economy is a disaster.  There's a war in Iraq. The jobless situation is devastating. The housing market is in shambles. Obama is the president. And the Democrats are in charge.

That leads to an obvious conclusion for most - that Obama and the Democrats have brought this upon us - that they are the ones who must pay the price for our pain.

If you have extra money and you want to invest in some projects, what will you choose? For example: securities, real estate, futures, bonds, etc. If you are interested in gold coin collecting, now present a suitable place for you to buy gold. Now let me introduce you Regal Gold Coins, which can offer you free gold investment kit to support your metals investment. It has years of experience in the industry and has a group of experts who are familiar with gold investment. So you will get latest news and resources related to precious metal prices, exchange rates & interest rates, economic trends & policies, etc.

 
Glenn Beck and Karl Rove and Swift-Boat financier Bob Perry who is sending hundreds of thousands to Susana Martinez, are not just trying to prevent New Mexico from, for example, participating in the new health care exchange that will bring competition for the first time into health insurance coverage. Their goal is not nearly so limited.  These men, Beck and Rove, and women like presidential contender Sarah Palin, and senate contender Christine O'Donnell in Delaware, are not about now. They are explicitly--they say so outloud--about reversing all the gains of the 1930s New Deal and even before. They want to forget the passion and suffering that brought about a century of liberal reform.

Alfred Brewer of Wichita, Kansas had no right to show up and vote in the primary in August. So says the GOP nominee for Secretary of State, Kris Kobach. That's because, Kobach has said, records show Brewer died in 1996. Kobach fears the voter rolls are rife with mistakes that will encourage voter fraud.

Reached Thursday at his home where he was raking leaves, Brewer, 78, was surprised some people thought he was dead.

"I don't think this is heaven, not when I'm raking leaves," he said.

The zombie voter would be a victim of 2 mixups, one a birthdate issue when Brewer originally registered decades ago with just "age" (in years) instead of DOB. Those legacy registrations produce a placeholder birth date of 1/1/1900 in the records. Second, Brewer has the same first and last name as his Dad, who died in 1996.

Question: if Republicans are expecting such a wave, why should GOP candidates need rightful voters purged from the election rolls?