From The Pilot
By Chris Fitzsimon - Wednesday, July 28, 2010
“We have terrorists running America. … If we allow it, these same folks will inflict more damage on our nation than any suicide bomber could ever hope for.”
Those paranoid delusions are not the work of an anonymous commenter on an obscure right-wing website whose owners are difficult to discover. They are from an article a couple of weeks ago on wakeupamerica.com, a website run by two Republican members of the General Assembly, Sen. Andrew Brock and Rep. Bryan Holloway.
Suggesting that the president is a terrorist more dangerous than a suicide bomber is normally the kind of statement that would prompt calls for apologies or result in other elected officials distancing themselves from the statements and the people who made them.
Not in this case. Wakeupamerica.com has been spewing this kind of venom since Brock and his pals created it.
Past articles have talked about “the movement to take back our country from the radical socialist agenda that Obama and his cronies are subversively implementing,” and they have warned that “the left’s policies, especially those policies aggressively set forward by the Obama administration, target the family and Christian churches for destruction.”
Not only have there been no repercussions for Brock or Holloway, the media have barely reported on their offensive antics.
Another well-known North Carolinian is also playing a prominent role in the far right’s national attack machine: Fred Eshelman, the CEO of Pharmaceutical Product Development Inc. in Wilmington.
The School of Pharmacy at UNC-Chapel Hill was renamed for Eshelman two years ago after he gave more than $30 million to the university. Eshelman was in the news recently for a large gift he made to UNC Wilmington and for ringing the NASDAQ bell on the 25th anniversary of his company.
But Eshelman is more than a prominent businessman and university benefactor. He is the principal funder of a group called RightChange.com that ran ads against Obama in the 2008 election that were so extreme that even a respected conservative group called them “ridiculous” and an “outright, nonsensical lie.”
RightChange ran ads in a congressional race earlier this year that featured an attack of the “50-foot Pelosi” and is now attacking Florida Gov. and Senate candidate Charlie Crist.
Documents filed with the IRS show that RightChange spent just under $300,000 in the second quarter of this year, most of it on consultants. One of them is Tim Pittman, an official in administration of Republican Gov. Jim Martin in the 1980s.
The other board members of RightChange are Republican legislators, Sen. Fletcher Hartsell and Rep. Jeff Barnhart. They have never explained their involvement with the group or how they feel about the offensive ads it runs.
Earlier this year, Eshelman was also one of the founders of yet another right-wing group, Real Jobs NC, whose first website featured more distortions about North Carolina’s taxes. The website was taken down, but you can bet it will be back and it’s likely that ridiculous attack ads will come with it.
Maybe outrageous statements calling the president a terrorist or running blatantly false ads isn’t really news anymore in the current political climate.
But surely the fact that four state legislators and one of the state’s most prominent business leaders are playing increasingly prominent roles in the far right’s national propaganda machine that produces the scurrilous attacks is newsworthy.
Why isn’t anybody asking more questions?
Chris Fitzsimon is executive director of N.C. Policy Watch. Contact him at chris@ncpolicywatch.com.
Moore Progressive
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Better Be Preparing for the Budget Storm
From The Pilot
The one thing everyone agreed on during this year's budget debate is that North Carolina's financial problems will be a lot worse the next time lawmakers put a budget together.
The $1.3 billion temporary tax increase passed in 2009 will expire next June. The $1.4 billion in federal money used to balance this year's budget will be gone, or at best dramatically reduced.
More students will be showing up at universities and community colleges. Medicaid enrollment is almost certain to increase, and the cost of health care continues to rise. Add it all up, and it is a shortfall that the N.C. Budget and Tax Center says could come close to $4 billion.
Filling that hole would be an almost impossible challenge in a normal year, but addressing it after cutting $3 billion in General Fund spending in the last biennium boggles the mind.
More devastating cuts and less new revenue are on the way, no matter how much lawmakers talk about cutting waste and inefficiency in government. The hole is simply too massive.
The easy cuts have been made, and so have many that were not easy and in a lot of cases were inadvisable because of the damage they have inflicted on the fundamental institutions of the state, from the safety net to education at every level.
Most of the talk to date about the $4 billion problem on the not too distant horizon has been cast in political terms, used as a talking point by Republicans to portray Democrats as fiscally irresponsible, though Republicans didn't rush forward with any brilliant ideas about where to find a billion dollars or two to set aside without laying off thousands of teachers or closing hospitals.
That's the way politics works, and this is an especially charged political year. But we need more than soundbites to get ready for what's shaping up as the worst state budget crisis in 75 years. We need political leaders in both parties to start working on solutions now, not two months before the next fiscal year begins.
The most obvious place to start would be an overhaul of the state's antiquated tax system, an effort that has stalled time and time again in the face of heated opposition from well-heeled special interests and demagoguery from groups ready to twist any mention of taxes into crass government-bashing to serve their ideological agenda.
And tax reform is not the only place we need in-depth discussions now to get ready for next year. The state's criminal justice system continues to lock up nonviolent offenders that could be better served for less money in alternative settings, yet alternative programs suffered their own rounds of budget cuts in the last two years.
There's plenty more that lawmakers should consider to get ready for next year's crisis, from an honest look at business incentives to the program that provides tuition grants for North Carolina students at private colleges regardless of the student's family income level.
But they need to get started soon, not wait until the middle of next year's session.
Chris Fitzsimon is executive director of N.C. Policy Watch. Contact him at chris@ncpolicywatch.com.
The one thing everyone agreed on during this year's budget debate is that North Carolina's financial problems will be a lot worse the next time lawmakers put a budget together.
The $1.3 billion temporary tax increase passed in 2009 will expire next June. The $1.4 billion in federal money used to balance this year's budget will be gone, or at best dramatically reduced.
More students will be showing up at universities and community colleges. Medicaid enrollment is almost certain to increase, and the cost of health care continues to rise. Add it all up, and it is a shortfall that the N.C. Budget and Tax Center says could come close to $4 billion.
Filling that hole would be an almost impossible challenge in a normal year, but addressing it after cutting $3 billion in General Fund spending in the last biennium boggles the mind.
More devastating cuts and less new revenue are on the way, no matter how much lawmakers talk about cutting waste and inefficiency in government. The hole is simply too massive.
The easy cuts have been made, and so have many that were not easy and in a lot of cases were inadvisable because of the damage they have inflicted on the fundamental institutions of the state, from the safety net to education at every level.
Most of the talk to date about the $4 billion problem on the not too distant horizon has been cast in political terms, used as a talking point by Republicans to portray Democrats as fiscally irresponsible, though Republicans didn't rush forward with any brilliant ideas about where to find a billion dollars or two to set aside without laying off thousands of teachers or closing hospitals.
That's the way politics works, and this is an especially charged political year. But we need more than soundbites to get ready for what's shaping up as the worst state budget crisis in 75 years. We need political leaders in both parties to start working on solutions now, not two months before the next fiscal year begins.
The most obvious place to start would be an overhaul of the state's antiquated tax system, an effort that has stalled time and time again in the face of heated opposition from well-heeled special interests and demagoguery from groups ready to twist any mention of taxes into crass government-bashing to serve their ideological agenda.
And tax reform is not the only place we need in-depth discussions now to get ready for next year. The state's criminal justice system continues to lock up nonviolent offenders that could be better served for less money in alternative settings, yet alternative programs suffered their own rounds of budget cuts in the last two years.
There's plenty more that lawmakers should consider to get ready for next year's crisis, from an honest look at business incentives to the program that provides tuition grants for North Carolina students at private colleges regardless of the student's family income level.
But they need to get started soon, not wait until the middle of next year's session.
Chris Fitzsimon is executive director of N.C. Policy Watch. Contact him at chris@ncpolicywatch.com.
Nope, Just Kidding: A New Day of Racial Harmony
From The Pilot
By Dusty Rhoades - Sunday, July 25, 2010
It's been, to say the least, an interesting couple of weeks in American race relations.
Things kicked off when the NAACP voted, at its annual convention, on a resolution that "condemns the bigoted -elements within the tea party and asks for them to be repudiated." Note that the statement doesn't call all TPers racist. And as we know, it's not unusual in American politics for one group to ask another to "repudiate" its more fringe elements - so long as those fringe elements are on the so-called "left."
On one occasion, for instance, the late Tim Russert called on Barack Obama to repudiate, of all people, Harry Belafonte, for referring to President George W. Bush as a "terrorist," as if the rantings of an aging calypso star were somehow the responsibility of every black politician.
But, boy howdy, ask the TPers to distance themselves from the people at their rallies who carry signs showing the president as a witch doctor, complete with bone in nose, and just watch their old gray heads explode.
The immediate reaction was to go into their standard attack mode - as always, a variation on the old schoolyard riposte, "I know you are, but what am I?" It was the NAACP, the tea partiers asserted, who were the real racists.
Then the leader of a group called the Tea Party Express, a guy named Mark Williams, published a mock letter from the NAACP to Abraham Lincoln. "We Colored People have taken a vote and decided that we don't cotton to that whole emancipation thing," Williams wrote. "Mr. Lincoln, you were the greatest racist ever. We had a great gig. Three squares, room and board, all our decisions made by the massa in the house."
Nope, no racism there. Within a few days, Williams was, as requested, repudiated. He and the Tea Party Express were tossed out of the the Tea Party Federation. The NAACP issued a press release commending the federation.
A new day of tolerance and understanding dawned in America. Ha ha! Just kidding.
Enter Andrew Breitbart, the man who gave the world the infamous ACORN "pimp" tapes, in which members of the community organizing group were supposedly caught on tape advising a fake pimp and his prostitute how to set up in business and avoid taxes. The tapes were later discovered by the California attorney general's office to have been "heavily edited." They cut out the fact that, among other things, one ACORN worker had called the cops and that the supposed "pimp" (shown in the intro in full Superfly regalia) had actually been dressed in a suit and tie and claimed he was a law student.
After that, Breitbart was discredited and never again believed or taken seriously by anyone of any significance. Hee hee! Got you again!
Breitbart claimed to have found a tape of a U.S. Department of Agriculture functionary named Shirley Sherrod telling an NAACP group that, in a former job, she hadn't given a white farmer who came to her for help "the full force of what she could do." She'd taken him to a white lawyer ("one of his own kind") and, as the clip ends, left him there.
The NAACP, apparently unaware of what a dishonest propagandist Breitbart is, condemned Sherrod. She lost her job with the USDA. Then the rest of the tape came out. Once again, things were not as Breitbart had presented them. Imagine that.
Sherrod found out that the lawyer she'd referred the farmer to hadn't done much. In fact, the poor guy was about to be foreclosed on. At that time, she went on to say, she realized that "it's really about those who have versus those who don't ... and they could be black; they could be white; they could be Hispanic."
She got to work, she helped save the man's farm, and she and his family remain friends to this day. He and his wife even went on CNN to try to clear Sherrod's name. Instead of a story of racism, it was a story of overcoming it. The NAACP and the White House apologized and USDA head Tom Vilsack offered Sherrod her job back. She's not sure she wants it, and who can blame her?
In the end, everyone learned a valuable lesson. From then on, everyone listened to what other people were actually saying, instead of filtering it through their own prejudices and trying to pick out little out-of-context nuggets to pelt their perceived enemies with.
Ho ho! That's a real knee-slapper, that one is.
Dusty Rhoades lives, writes and practices law in Carthage. Contact him at dustyr@nc.rr.com.
By Dusty Rhoades - Sunday, July 25, 2010
It's been, to say the least, an interesting couple of weeks in American race relations.
Things kicked off when the NAACP voted, at its annual convention, on a resolution that "condemns the bigoted -elements within the tea party and asks for them to be repudiated." Note that the statement doesn't call all TPers racist. And as we know, it's not unusual in American politics for one group to ask another to "repudiate" its more fringe elements - so long as those fringe elements are on the so-called "left."
On one occasion, for instance, the late Tim Russert called on Barack Obama to repudiate, of all people, Harry Belafonte, for referring to President George W. Bush as a "terrorist," as if the rantings of an aging calypso star were somehow the responsibility of every black politician.
But, boy howdy, ask the TPers to distance themselves from the people at their rallies who carry signs showing the president as a witch doctor, complete with bone in nose, and just watch their old gray heads explode.
The immediate reaction was to go into their standard attack mode - as always, a variation on the old schoolyard riposte, "I know you are, but what am I?" It was the NAACP, the tea partiers asserted, who were the real racists.
Then the leader of a group called the Tea Party Express, a guy named Mark Williams, published a mock letter from the NAACP to Abraham Lincoln. "We Colored People have taken a vote and decided that we don't cotton to that whole emancipation thing," Williams wrote. "Mr. Lincoln, you were the greatest racist ever. We had a great gig. Three squares, room and board, all our decisions made by the massa in the house."
Nope, no racism there. Within a few days, Williams was, as requested, repudiated. He and the Tea Party Express were tossed out of the the Tea Party Federation. The NAACP issued a press release commending the federation.
A new day of tolerance and understanding dawned in America. Ha ha! Just kidding.
Enter Andrew Breitbart, the man who gave the world the infamous ACORN "pimp" tapes, in which members of the community organizing group were supposedly caught on tape advising a fake pimp and his prostitute how to set up in business and avoid taxes. The tapes were later discovered by the California attorney general's office to have been "heavily edited." They cut out the fact that, among other things, one ACORN worker had called the cops and that the supposed "pimp" (shown in the intro in full Superfly regalia) had actually been dressed in a suit and tie and claimed he was a law student.
After that, Breitbart was discredited and never again believed or taken seriously by anyone of any significance. Hee hee! Got you again!
Breitbart claimed to have found a tape of a U.S. Department of Agriculture functionary named Shirley Sherrod telling an NAACP group that, in a former job, she hadn't given a white farmer who came to her for help "the full force of what she could do." She'd taken him to a white lawyer ("one of his own kind") and, as the clip ends, left him there.
The NAACP, apparently unaware of what a dishonest propagandist Breitbart is, condemned Sherrod. She lost her job with the USDA. Then the rest of the tape came out. Once again, things were not as Breitbart had presented them. Imagine that.
Sherrod found out that the lawyer she'd referred the farmer to hadn't done much. In fact, the poor guy was about to be foreclosed on. At that time, she went on to say, she realized that "it's really about those who have versus those who don't ... and they could be black; they could be white; they could be Hispanic."
She got to work, she helped save the man's farm, and she and his family remain friends to this day. He and his wife even went on CNN to try to clear Sherrod's name. Instead of a story of racism, it was a story of overcoming it. The NAACP and the White House apologized and USDA head Tom Vilsack offered Sherrod her job back. She's not sure she wants it, and who can blame her?
In the end, everyone learned a valuable lesson. From then on, everyone listened to what other people were actually saying, instead of filtering it through their own prejudices and trying to pick out little out-of-context nuggets to pelt their perceived enemies with.
Ho ho! That's a real knee-slapper, that one is.
Dusty Rhoades lives, writes and practices law in Carthage. Contact him at dustyr@nc.rr.com.
Look Where Burr's Sympathies Lie
From The Pilot
By Kevin Smith - Sunday, July 25, 2010
Richard Burr has collected 6.3 million reasons to like his chances for re-election this November. Elaine Marshall has - well, Richard Burr. It's left to North Carolinians to decide whether $6.3 million is enough to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.
Project Vote Smart has a page where you can plug in a senator's name and see how he or she is rated by various interest groups. It's a good way to see where a senator's loyalties lie and whether his or her values reflect your values.
For instance, for the years from 2005 to April 2010, Burr received three A's and two B's from the gun owners of America. Compare that with his scores from the National Education Association, which are straight F's. Go down the list of education-related interests and his scores are, with one exception from one group in one year, either F's on a grade scale or below 31 on a percentage basis.
We may reasonably debate what, if any, restrictions are appropriate to Second Amendment rights, but giving Americans the tools to restore and sustain our economic viability should be sacrosanct. In Richard Burr's world, Little Johnny may or may not be able to read, but he can shoot. What does that mean for his prospects?
If our children want to compete for the best jobs, they're likely to have to do so in a globalized economy. It will be the caliber of their minds that matters. In the battles that will most directly determine the quality of their lives and the lives of their progeny, Richard Burr leaves our children out unarmed.
Burr's campaign ran an ad during the primary in which several supporters affirmed that Burr is the right choice for veterans. Here again, ratings from veterans groups over his time as a senator tell a different story. Burr ranks constantly low - all the more so when you consider the number of military bases and retired military in North Carolina. His highest rating from the major veterans groups during his time in the Senate is a C.
Burr is the ranking member of the Veteran's Affairs Committee, but he's no friend to veterans.
Here's another interesting paradox: Burr has an 85 percent rating from the National Right to Life Committee and an 88 percent rating from the Family Research Council, but only a 42 percent rating from the Children's Defense Fund, 0 percent from the American Public Health Association and 25 percent from the American Hospital Association.
What those numbers suggest is a man who is committed to the sanctity of life before birth but who has a vexing disregard for the sanctity life outside of the womb. Who does Burr represent? Does he represent the interests of upper-class, middle-class, working-class and impoverished North Carolinians equally? The numbers give us a clear understanding.
We know he supports business - Business-Industry PAC, 100 percent, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers, 100 percent, all as you would expect. We know he's no friend to organized labor - AFL-CIO, 6 percent, American Federation of Government Employees, 8 percent, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, 0 percent, also to be expected.
But what about regular, not necessarily union, middle- and working-class North Carolinians? It turns out that there's an organization called themiddleclass.org. How does it rate our senior senator? For the years 2005-2009, he got straight F's, a 36 percent rating for 2009. He's just as weak on poverty issues as he is on middle-class issues. Burr's interests reflect the interests of those best able to pay for his support.
Richard Burr will use all of the considerable resources at his command to try to persuade a majority of North Carolinians that he's looking out for them. But in the words of Bill Parcells, "You are what your record says you are." Richard Burr's record says he's six years late for his regular tee time. North Carolinians deserve better.
Kevin Smith lives in Aberdeen. Contact him at kevinasmith@gmx.com.
By Kevin Smith - Sunday, July 25, 2010
Richard Burr has collected 6.3 million reasons to like his chances for re-election this November. Elaine Marshall has - well, Richard Burr. It's left to North Carolinians to decide whether $6.3 million is enough to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.
Project Vote Smart has a page where you can plug in a senator's name and see how he or she is rated by various interest groups. It's a good way to see where a senator's loyalties lie and whether his or her values reflect your values.
For instance, for the years from 2005 to April 2010, Burr received three A's and two B's from the gun owners of America. Compare that with his scores from the National Education Association, which are straight F's. Go down the list of education-related interests and his scores are, with one exception from one group in one year, either F's on a grade scale or below 31 on a percentage basis.
We may reasonably debate what, if any, restrictions are appropriate to Second Amendment rights, but giving Americans the tools to restore and sustain our economic viability should be sacrosanct. In Richard Burr's world, Little Johnny may or may not be able to read, but he can shoot. What does that mean for his prospects?
If our children want to compete for the best jobs, they're likely to have to do so in a globalized economy. It will be the caliber of their minds that matters. In the battles that will most directly determine the quality of their lives and the lives of their progeny, Richard Burr leaves our children out unarmed.
Burr's campaign ran an ad during the primary in which several supporters affirmed that Burr is the right choice for veterans. Here again, ratings from veterans groups over his time as a senator tell a different story. Burr ranks constantly low - all the more so when you consider the number of military bases and retired military in North Carolina. His highest rating from the major veterans groups during his time in the Senate is a C.
Burr is the ranking member of the Veteran's Affairs Committee, but he's no friend to veterans.
Here's another interesting paradox: Burr has an 85 percent rating from the National Right to Life Committee and an 88 percent rating from the Family Research Council, but only a 42 percent rating from the Children's Defense Fund, 0 percent from the American Public Health Association and 25 percent from the American Hospital Association.
What those numbers suggest is a man who is committed to the sanctity of life before birth but who has a vexing disregard for the sanctity life outside of the womb. Who does Burr represent? Does he represent the interests of upper-class, middle-class, working-class and impoverished North Carolinians equally? The numbers give us a clear understanding.
We know he supports business - Business-Industry PAC, 100 percent, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers, 100 percent, all as you would expect. We know he's no friend to organized labor - AFL-CIO, 6 percent, American Federation of Government Employees, 8 percent, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, 0 percent, also to be expected.
But what about regular, not necessarily union, middle- and working-class North Carolinians? It turns out that there's an organization called themiddleclass.org. How does it rate our senior senator? For the years 2005-2009, he got straight F's, a 36 percent rating for 2009. He's just as weak on poverty issues as he is on middle-class issues. Burr's interests reflect the interests of those best able to pay for his support.
Richard Burr will use all of the considerable resources at his command to try to persuade a majority of North Carolinians that he's looking out for them. But in the words of Bill Parcells, "You are what your record says you are." Richard Burr's record says he's six years late for his regular tee time. North Carolinians deserve better.
Kevin Smith lives in Aberdeen. Contact him at kevinasmith@gmx.com.
Saturday, July 24, 2010
A letter to losers (of jobs)
From The Raleigh News and Observer
Dear Unemployed Person
or Persons:
These are tough times for Americans. They're especially tough times for people like you who have lost your jobs and who still can't find new ones, because of the Obama Recession, which started at approximately 12 noon on Jan. 20, 2009, after eight years of nonstop growth and prosperity under President George W. Bush.
We sympathize with your situation, and we know how hard it must be to be without a job as the bills pile up. (Technically, we don't really know how hard it must be, because we all have jobs - with lots of great benefits, too - but we can certainly imagine how hard it must be. We'd hate to be in your shoes right now.)
Anyway, we sympathize with what you and your loved ones must be going through - although why unemployed people still deserve to have loved ones when they're not doing a single thing to help them is a total mystery to us.
We're writing to set the record straight after weeks of misinformation put out by the Obama administration and their friends in the liberal media. You may have heard that Republicans have been opposed to extending unemployment benefits for the millions of Americans whose benefits have already run out.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
The truth is: Republicans haven't been opposed to extending unemployment benefits. We've been opposed to letting the Senate vote on extending unemployment benefits - that's a totally different thing.
You may also have heard that some of us have had some unflattering things to say about unemployment benefits in general, and about how receiving unemployment benefits is a whole lot easier than looking for work and only encourages people to stay unemployed.
We weren't talking about you. You're almost certainly not the kind of person who'd sit on his duff week after week and take advantage of the generosity of hardworking, taxpaying, real Americans.
You know the kind of person we mean.
The other thing you might have heard about us is that we're "hypocrites," because now we oppose extending unemployment benefits, when we used to be in favor of them when George Bush was president.
Or maybe you've heard us called even bigger "hypocrites" because we insisted that any extended unemployment benefits be paid for, rather than adding to the deficit - even though we aren't insisting that extended tax cuts for wealthy Americans be paid for, and even though those particular tax cuts add much more to the deficit than unemployment benefits would.
We have a very simple answer to these charges: Where's Obama's birth certificate?
Besides, those are just numbers - we have the facts on our side. And the No. 1 fact is this: Everyone knows that Republicans stand for fiscal discipline and responsible budgeting. In fact, whenever fiscal discipline has broken down and the budget has gotten out of control, Republicans are the first ones to say who's responsible. (Hint: Not us.)
Mitch McConnell, our Republican Senate leader, put it exactly right the other day when he talked about the dangers of excessive government spending to help people who can't even hold a job. "At what point," he asked, "do we pivot and start being concerned about our children and our grandchildren?"
To Republicans, the answer is perfectly clear: We pivot when there's a Democrat in the White House.
"The president knows that Republicans support extending unemployment insurance..."
House Republican Leader
John Boehner
House Republican Leader
John Boehner
Dear Unemployed Person
or Persons:
These are tough times for Americans. They're especially tough times for people like you who have lost your jobs and who still can't find new ones, because of the Obama Recession, which started at approximately 12 noon on Jan. 20, 2009, after eight years of nonstop growth and prosperity under President George W. Bush.
We sympathize with your situation, and we know how hard it must be to be without a job as the bills pile up. (Technically, we don't really know how hard it must be, because we all have jobs - with lots of great benefits, too - but we can certainly imagine how hard it must be. We'd hate to be in your shoes right now.)
Anyway, we sympathize with what you and your loved ones must be going through - although why unemployed people still deserve to have loved ones when they're not doing a single thing to help them is a total mystery to us.
We're writing to set the record straight after weeks of misinformation put out by the Obama administration and their friends in the liberal media. You may have heard that Republicans have been opposed to extending unemployment benefits for the millions of Americans whose benefits have already run out.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
The truth is: Republicans haven't been opposed to extending unemployment benefits. We've been opposed to letting the Senate vote on extending unemployment benefits - that's a totally different thing.
You may also have heard that some of us have had some unflattering things to say about unemployment benefits in general, and about how receiving unemployment benefits is a whole lot easier than looking for work and only encourages people to stay unemployed.
We weren't talking about you. You're almost certainly not the kind of person who'd sit on his duff week after week and take advantage of the generosity of hardworking, taxpaying, real Americans.
You know the kind of person we mean.
The other thing you might have heard about us is that we're "hypocrites," because now we oppose extending unemployment benefits, when we used to be in favor of them when George Bush was president.
Or maybe you've heard us called even bigger "hypocrites" because we insisted that any extended unemployment benefits be paid for, rather than adding to the deficit - even though we aren't insisting that extended tax cuts for wealthy Americans be paid for, and even though those particular tax cuts add much more to the deficit than unemployment benefits would.
We have a very simple answer to these charges: Where's Obama's birth certificate?
Besides, those are just numbers - we have the facts on our side. And the No. 1 fact is this: Everyone knows that Republicans stand for fiscal discipline and responsible budgeting. In fact, whenever fiscal discipline has broken down and the budget has gotten out of control, Republicans are the first ones to say who's responsible. (Hint: Not us.)
Mitch McConnell, our Republican Senate leader, put it exactly right the other day when he talked about the dangers of excessive government spending to help people who can't even hold a job. "At what point," he asked, "do we pivot and start being concerned about our children and our grandchildren?"
To Republicans, the answer is perfectly clear: We pivot when there's a Democrat in the White House.
Rick Horowitz is a syndicated columnist. You can write to him at rickhoro@execpc.com.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Fishermen rebuild oyster reefs with stimulus money
From Raleigh News and Observer
he Associated Press
he Associated Press
WILMINGTON -- Federal stimulus funds have been doled out far and wide. And deep. Like the bottom of a North Carolina sound.
About 70 fishermen are being paid to scatter oyster shells in shallow waters along the state's coast, said Ted Wilgis, education coordinator for the North Carolina Coastal Federation.
That includes a 1-acre area in the Middle Sound off Wrightsville Beach that fishermen James and Steven Galloway hope will keep their family business going for years to come.
About 70 fishermen are being paid to scatter oyster shells in shallow waters along the state's coast, said Ted Wilgis, education coordinator for the North Carolina Coastal Federation.
That includes a 1-acre area in the Middle Sound off Wrightsville Beach that fishermen James and Steven Galloway hope will keep their family business going for years to come.
The site will be closed for four years to allow the oysters to grow before they are harvested.
James Galloway, 56, told The Star-News of Wilmington about 75 percent of his income comes from collecting and selling oysters.
"It helps us in more ways than one," said Steven Galloway, 21. "It's work for now. It's good money. Then in a few years, we'll have more oysters. It's sort of win-win all the way around."
Besides the fishermen, about 65 other jobs for barge operators, lab technicians and tugboat captains are collecting paychecks from the coastal federation's $5 million grant under the stimulus package, Wilgis said.
The project has also paid earlier this summer to create two large oyster reefs covering 48 acres in Pamlico Sound that will not be reopened to fishing.
The work comes as oysters need to find a hard surface to grow on after drifting in ocean currents for the first several weeks of their lives. The stacks of old oyster shells provide the habitat they need.
Oysters also play an important ecological role, said Troy Alphin, a researcher at the University of North Carolina at Wilmington's Center for Marine Science.
Oyster reefs shelter fish, crabs and other small marine creatures, which provide food for larger fish. Oysters also filter and improve the coastal waters.
James Galloway, 56, told The Star-News of Wilmington about 75 percent of his income comes from collecting and selling oysters.
"It helps us in more ways than one," said Steven Galloway, 21. "It's work for now. It's good money. Then in a few years, we'll have more oysters. It's sort of win-win all the way around."
Besides the fishermen, about 65 other jobs for barge operators, lab technicians and tugboat captains are collecting paychecks from the coastal federation's $5 million grant under the stimulus package, Wilgis said.
The project has also paid earlier this summer to create two large oyster reefs covering 48 acres in Pamlico Sound that will not be reopened to fishing.
The work comes as oysters need to find a hard surface to grow on after drifting in ocean currents for the first several weeks of their lives. The stacks of old oyster shells provide the habitat they need.
Oysters also play an important ecological role, said Troy Alphin, a researcher at the University of North Carolina at Wilmington's Center for Marine Science.
Oyster reefs shelter fish, crabs and other small marine creatures, which provide food for larger fish. Oysters also filter and improve the coastal waters.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Marshall, Burr volley over jobless benefits
Democratic Senate candidate Elaine Marshall on Tuesday accused Republican Sen. Richard Burr of helping block the extension of unemployment benefits for millions of North Carolinians.
Marshall, the secretary of state, held a news conference outside Burr's Winston-Salem office, where she delivered a petition of 15,000 signatures urging Burr to end his opposition.
"For months my opponent has been working against our working families - blocking the extension of unemployment benefits," Marshall said in prepared remarks. "Because of this partisan obstruction, more than 2.5 million Americans have been cut off (from) unemployment benefits they desperately need to survive."
She was accompanied by several unemployed North Carolinians.Marshall, the secretary of state, held a news conference outside Burr's Winston-Salem office, where she delivered a petition of 15,000 signatures urging Burr to end his opposition.
"For months my opponent has been working against our working families - blocking the extension of unemployment benefits," Marshall said in prepared remarks. "Because of this partisan obstruction, more than 2.5 million Americans have been cut off (from) unemployment benefits they desperately need to survive."
Burr's office released a statement saying that he agrees with President Barack Obama's statement last November that benefits must be extended in "a financially responsible way" that does not add to the national debt.
Burr said Republican proposals to pay for extended benefits by making cuts elsewhere in government had been blocked by Democrats four times.
"I think everyone agrees that we should extend unemployment benefits, but one party is using this as a political tool while the other party wants to extend the benefits and pay for them," Burr said.
Meanwhile, the state Democratic Party released a Web video of Burr giving a C-SPAN interview in March in which he said automatically extending unemployment benefits for 12 months would be a "discouragement to individuals out there to actually go out and go through the interview process."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)