Hillary Clinton to introduce constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United within the first 30 days after she elected President.

Courtesy of HuffPo:

Hillary Clinton announced on Saturday that she would introduce a constitutional amendment within the first 30 days of her presidency to overturn the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision, which paved the way for unlimited corporate, union and individual spending on elections. 

Clinton unveiled her plan in a video at Netroots, an annual progressive gathering taking place this year in St. Louis. 

I know which group of folks is going to want to take credit for this, but it should be remembered that the whole Citizens United case was about that group trying to distribute an anti-Hillary propaganda film before the 2008 elections, and suing because the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act would not allow them to do so.

Of COURSE Hillary is going to want to do something about this once she is elected.

Well if this next Presidential election is determined solely by money raised, then we might as well just give it to Jeb Bush now.

Courtesy of HuffPo: 
  
Jeb Bush's presidential campaign announced Thursday it had raised a combined $114 million since the former governor of Florida began exploring a run for the White House earlier this year. 

"Jeb is encouraged and grateful for the tremendous early support and enthusiasm his candidacy has generated since he launched his campaign," Woody Johnson, Bush's national finance chairman, said in a statement. "We are confident our campaign will have the resources needed to get Jeb’s conservative record, message and vision for the future out to voters across the country.” 

Bush's campaign said it had raised $11.4 million in the 16 days since the governor announced his candidacy last month. The haul amounts to an average of $700,000 raised per day in the first two weeks of his official campaign. Aides to Bush did not yet disclose how much cash the candidate has on hand, nor did they share the number of donors who contributed to his fundraising total. Presidential candidates are required to report those details and other fundraising information to the FEC by July 15th.

That essentially leaves virtually all of Bush's rivals on the Right in the dust, and even Hillary Clinton so far is only announcing donations of around 45 million. (Though it should be noted that the superPAC backing her, Priorities USA, has not announced their donations as of yet.)

I think it is becoming crystal clear that if politics is now just a numbers game, which is how Republicans want it set up, that the ONLY person who has any shot at beating Jebbie is Hillary. 

And that is sad for a lot of different reasons. 

Personally I am sickened by this whole thing and really, really want somebody to introduce a bill to get all of this money out of politics. And then of course have the pull to get it passed.

I am literally embarrassed for the rest of the world to see how we conduct our so-called "democracy" here in the United States.

With the Citizens United decisions having blurred campaign finance law the FEC Chairwoman is essentially throwing in the towel.

Courtesy of the AP: 

The chairwoman of the Federal Election Commission says she's largely given up hope of reining in abuses in raising and spending money in the 2016 presidential campaign and calls the agency she oversees "worse than dysfunctional." 

In an interview with The New York Times, Ann M. Ravel says she was determined to "bridge the partisan gap" and see that the agency confronted its problems when she became its chair last December. She said she had now essentially abandoned efforts to work out agreements on what she saw as much-needed enforcement measures. 

Instead, Ravel said she plans on concentrating on getting information out publicly, rather than continuing what she sees as a futile attempt to take action against major violations, the Times reported in a story posted to its website Saturday night. She said she was resigned to the fact that "there is not going to be any real enforcement" in the coming election, the newspaper reported. 

"The likelihood of the laws being enforced is slim," said Ravel, a Democrat. "I never want to give up, but I'm not under any illusions. People think the FEC is dysfunctional. It's worse than dysfunctional."

I can't say I'm surprised by this in the least, and in fact I assumed that the 2016 campaign season would be a free for all. 

However it is painfully clear that having billionaires buying candidates like children choosing puppies from a pet store is destroying our democracy, and something obviously has to be done to change things.

My daughter and I actually got into an argument over this the other day, with her angrily complaining that the Boomers broke the election system, and need to fix it. And with me agreeing with her, but pointing out that since it currently benefits the Republicans that there is no political will to do so.

At this point I am not sure what it will take for the two parties to come together to create a newer, more comprehensive, version of the old McCain-Feingold Act that would have the tools needed to rein in the outright purchasing of candidates, and the multi-millions of dollars being spent by corporations to decide the outcome of elections.

Citizens United and Breitbart to give Duck Dynasty star "free speech" award for comparing homosexuality to bestiality. I should be more surprised at this right?

Courtesy of Politico:  

Citizens United and Breitbart News will be honoring “Duck Dynasty” star Phil Robertson with a free-speech award after last year’s controversial comments on homosexuality. 

The Hollywood Reporter wrote on Tuesday that Citizens United, a conservative nonprofit organization, and Breitbart News, a conservative news organization, will give Robertson, 67, the “Andrew Breitbart Defender of the First Amendment Award” at the upcoming Conservative Political Action Conference

The award comes over one year after Robertson called same-sex relationships “not logical” in an interview with GQ Magazine. 

“It seems like, to me, a vagina — as a man — would be more desirable than a man’s anus. That’s just me. I’m just thinking: There’s more there! She’s got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I’m saying? But hey, sin: It’s not logical, my man. It’s just not logical,” Robertson said for the January 2014 edition of the magazine. 

During the interview, he also compared “homosexual behavior” with bestiality.

I wonder what's next?

Will  Rand Paul get a "Defender of the First Amendment" award for suggesting that vaccinations lead to "profound mental disorders?"

Perhaps Scott Walker should receive the award for responding to a question about evolution with "I'm going to punt on that one as well."

Or maybe former Breitbart journalists Charles C. Johnson will receive the honor for recently claiming that President Obama's birth certificate, and virtually all family photos of him, are fake?

You know just maybe Citizens United and Breitbart are confusing free speech with simple ignorance and an inability to separate fact from religious fables or conspiracy theories.

I guess next on their agenda is to give the Flat Earth Society a life time achievement award for not buckling under to overwhelming scientific research, or even common sense,

Koch brothers plan to spend 889 million dollars in 2016. Did anybody else's blood just run cold?

Courtesy of Politico: 

The Koch brothers’ political operation intends to spend $889 million in the run-up to the 2016 elections, according to an attendee at the operation’s annual winter donor gathering in the California desert. 

The spending goal, shared with donors at a Monday morning session at the Rancho Mirage Ritz Carlton, reflects the sweeping ambition of a private conservative political network that in many ways has eclipsed the power of the official Republican Party.

The $889 million spending goal dwarfs the $404 million the Republican National Committee spent during the 2012 election and the $188 million it dropped during last year’s midterm campaign.

Almost a billion dollars spent by one family in an attempt to buy elections. That should frighten just about everybody. 

Unless of you are the beneficiary of that kind of spending of course.

From this same gathering comes this quote:

“Americans have taken an important step in slowing down the march toward collectivism,” Charles Koch said in his speech, seemingly in reference to the Republican takeover of the Senate during the 2014 midterm elections.  

“But as many of you know, we don’t rest on our laurels. We are already back at work and hard at it! In fact, the work never really ends. Because the struggle for freedom never ends,” Koch said.

You know there is a part of me, a hopeful part of me, that wants to believe in the American voter and trust that they cannot be swayed by enormous ad buys in local markets by outside groups.

But then I remember what happened up here in Alaska this last election cycle, and I know I am being naive.

There is simply no way that Dan Sullivan should have beaten Mark Begich, and simply pit without the Koch brothers and Karl Rove he wouldn't have.

Since the Citizens United decision politics has become a numbers game.

In many ways it has ALWAYS been a numbers game, but these days it is not the number of voters that seems to count, it is the number of dollars spent for each of those voters.

Sad, but undeniably true.

We now have some of the best legislators that corporate money can buy, and we as voters allowed it to happen.

Remember folks, you don't get the America you want, you get the America you deserve.

After day of counting absentee ballots AP calls Alaska Senate race for Dan Sullivan.

Courtesy of Politico:  

Republican Dan Sullivan has won the Alaska Senate race, ousting Democratic incumbent Mark Begich, according to The Associated Press, which called the race for Sullivan late Tuesday night following the first day of counting early and absentee ballots. 

Sullivan leads Begich by 7,911 votes, according to the latest tally. Even though Begich gained some ground on Tuesday, and thousands of ballots are left to be counted, the AP said “the results indicated that Begich could not overcome Sullivan’s lead.” 

“I am deeply humbled and honored to be chosen by my fellow Alaskans to serve them in the United States Senate,” Sullivan said in a statement. “From day one we told our supporters that we would run a campaign that Alaskans could be proud of, and that’s what we did.” 

Begich’s campaign is not conceding, the AP reported. 

As I think some of you are aware I essentially determined that Mark Begich did not have a chance of  pulling out a victory here the day after the election.

In response I received a rather ugly e-mail accusing me of essentially being a traitor and of hurting his chances by writing him off before the ballots had been counted. I am not sure how my post could make ballots magically disappear but apparently I have incredible powers of which I remain blissfully unaware.

Look I doubt there are too many people up here that wanted Mark to win more than I did. Hell I even had the only Mark Begich sign for several blocks around.

But facts are facts, and as progressives we respect the facts.

This election was obviously for sale, and in the end the Democrats simply did not have the money to compete.

It is clear to everybody that Dan Sullivan is a Koch whore, and he is certainly not the only one representing us in Washington.

And look who finally came out to connect her name to Sullivan now that it is no longer a political liability.

If money really is now to be considered free speech, then the conservatives are screaming at the top of their lungs.

Courtesy of Salon:

There are no guarantees that future Democratic candidates will replicate Obama’s 2012 electoral success. The conservative financiers involved then regard the money that they spent that year as the initial down payment on a long-term investment, even if it did not immediately pay off. After the general election, Sheldon Adelson announced that he planned to “double” his investment in future races. “I happen to be in a unique business where winning and losing is the basis of the entire business. So I don’t cry when I lose. There’s always a new hand coming up. I know in the long run we’re going to win.” Marc Short, one of the strategists behind the political activities of Charles and David Koch, echoed that thought: “Our members are committed to the long term, not to one individual cycle.” 

In preparation for the long-term battle, these billionaires already have altered their campaign approach to maximize the odds of winning. After studying what went wrong with the 2012 campaign, individuals such as Adelson are aiming for a different kind of GOP nominee. According to Adelson’s friend Victor Chaltiel, “he doesn’t want a crazy extremist to be the nominee. He wants someone who has the chance to win the election, who is reasonable in his positions, who has convictions but is not totally crazy.” Meanwhile, Republican National Committee member Shawl Steel said that Adelson has learned from the 2012 defeat: “The candidate will have to have a strong resume—no sudden lightning-new guy—will have to build a formidable fundraising apparatus and really be emotionally tethered to bringing in middle-class Latinos, Asian Pacifics, Jews and blacks like never before.” 

Understanding the importance of the top conservative billionaires, GOP strategist and former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said that one of the most important elements in the 2016 presidential campaign would be who would win the “Sheldon Primary.” Referring to the super-wealthy benefactor, Fleischer noted that “anybody running for the Republican nomination would want to have Sheldon at his side.” The same is true for Charles and David Koch. With their abundant resources, grassroots network, and willingness to spend to influence elections, their role in the GOP is of utmost importance. And like Adelson, they have sought to learn from 2012 and develop new electoral strategies. From their perspective, it is crucial to adapt to the political environment and alter public outreach strategies. James Davis of Freedom Partners, a Koch-financed group, said donors must test and refine their message: “Being in the field and testing during the slower periods, and in smaller areas, allows you to refine strategy and tactics so that you can make the larger investments with confidence.”

And if you are paying attention to what is happening in this midterm, you can already see how muhc money the Koch brothers and Adelson are pouring into campaigns, and how exactly that money is being spent. 

In Alaska for instance the Koch brothers have spent over one point three million dollars to defeat Senator Mark Begich, with plans to spend another five point five.

But this is just the beginning, the donations are flowing from what seems to be a bottomless pit of conservative money, and there seems to be no end in sight.

As Democrats we have the energy, the ideas, and the numbers. But if money is the deciding factor in who wins elections, then we are all but doomed.

That is why we HAVE to show up in huge number in 2014 and 2016.

We must show up in numbers too big to obscure with piles of money, be too loud to be quieted down by burying us under mountains of  cash, and too energized to be slowed down by purchasing obstacles to place in our way.

We are the future, and we must show them all that the future is not for sale.

Ted Cruz warns that the proposed amendment to curb out of control spending on campaigns could get SNL creator Lorne Michaels thrown in jail. Say what?

If you can watch that clip with a straight face you are a better man (Or woman) than I.

For those who cannot stand the sound of Cruz's voice, here is what he said courtesy of Politico:

Sen. Ted Cruz says the comedy of NBC’s “Saturday Night Live” is at risk and creator Lorne Michaels could be thrown in jail if a proposed Constitutional amendment on campaign finance is passed. 

“Congress would have the power to make it a criminal offense, Lorne Michaels could be put in jail under this amendment for making fun of any politician. That is extraordinary. It is breathtaking and it is dangerous,” the Texas Republican argued on the Senate floor on Tuesday, with a board of stills from the late-night sketch show displayed behind him. 

“Well, NBC which airs Saturday Night Live, is a corporation,” Cruz said, who gave his own impression of Dana Carvey as President George H.W. Bush. 

“I grew up watching Saturday Night Live, I love Saturday Night Live. Saturday Night Live over the years, has had some of the most tremendous political satire,” the senator said. “Who can forget in 2008, Saturday Night Live’s wickedly funny characterization of the Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin?” 

“It was wickedly funny and also [had] a profoundly powerful effect on people’s assessment of Gov. Palin, who’s a friend of mine, ” he added. 

According to Cruz he also reached out to former SNL alum, now Senator, Al Franken who tried to explain the actual impact of the amendment, but obviously that only served to confuse Cruz.

To be clear this amendment says NOTHING about free speech, or the ability to lampoon politicians. 

It is solely focused on campaign spending by corporations with deep pockets who are able to spend millions of dollars in local and national campaigns in order to ensure that their chosen politician wins.

Okay I am beginning to think that this whole schitck of Cruz's is some long drawn out Tea Party performance art that has him saying and doing crazy things simply for attention. And then at some point he will stop in mid sentence, reveal that he was hired by the Democrats to troll the Republicans, take a bow and walk out of the Senate chamber mumbling to himself, "I really cannot believe they bought that act."

It is either that or this guy is actually under the impression that he is a serious politician, and has plans to further this political career by taking a run at the White House.

Which one sounds less crazy to you?

Robert Reich explains America's Koch problem.

You know I am not always a huge fan of petitions, but I am so goddamn sick and tired of these rich assholes undermining our democracy that I think this is one petition that deserves our support.

So wait, we LOVE Citizens United now?

Courtesy of Mother Jones:  

Four years ago, in his inaugural State of the Union address, President Obama famously shamed the Supreme Court's five conservative justices for their decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. The court, Obama said, "reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests—including foreign corporations—to spend without limit in our elections." Democratic lawmakers, activists, operatives, and donors piled on, condemning the ruling as "scandalous," a "disaster," and "bad for American democracy." When a subsequent court decision, nodding to Citizens United, opened the door to super-PACs, a new breed of political committee that can raise and spend unlimited amounts of cash, Obama branded them "a threat to our democracy." 

The Obama of 2010 might not recognize the Democratic Party of 2014. 

In the intervening years, Obama and his fellow Democrats embraced big-money politics. Democrats formed super-PACs to defend the presidency, gain seats in the House of Representatives, and preserve their majority in the Senate. Obama is the first president in history to utilize a tax-exempt 501(c)(4) group, which can accept unlimited sums from anonymous donors, to promote his policy agenda. (Organizing for Action, the president's nonprofit, chose to voluntarily disclose its 2013 donors.) And with an eye toward the 2016 presidential race, Democratic operatives have gone to work for various super-PACs mounting a campaign-in-waiting for presumed front-runner Hillary Clinton. If Democrats hate Citizens United on paper, they love it in practice.

Wouldn't it be just like the Right Wing to fight for a Supreme Court decision that ended up being more of a benefit to the Left Wing?

Still, I hate to be a wet blanket or anything, but this law needs to be thrown out and REAL campaign finance reform needs to be implemented. Period!

The idea that those with the most money get to choose our elected leaders should be something that unifies both the Right and the Left.

Bernie Sanders takes to the Senate floor and tells the American people who is REALLY behind the defund Obamacare drive, and what's next on their agenda.

You go Bernie!

This is EXACTLY how the liberals need to publicize what is going on in this country.

Citizens United opened the floodgates for wealthy businessmen to take over out political system, and the Koch brothers and other conservative donors did not waste a moment taking advantage of it.

I love that he submitted the entire New York Times article into he record.

Another "War on Women" post. The Hillary Clinton edition.

'They're making a movie to attack my character? Good luck with that."

Courtesy of the Hollywood Reporter:  

A day after CNN and NBC canceled plans for a Hillary Clinton documentary and miniseries, respectively, another group, Citizens United, said it will press ahead with plans for a movie about the former first lady, senator and secretary of state. 

The yet-to-be titled movie will be distributed theatrically, shown on television and released on DVD, though partnerships are under wraps so far. Citizens United is a conservative organization frequently attacked by liberals, primarily because it successfully sued the U.S. government over a 2008 movie that was also about Clinton. 

In Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that blocking the airing of Hillary: The Movie on the grounds that it amounted to political advertising was an unconstitutional breach of free speech. 

David Bossie, president and chairman of Citizens United, says the movie will be released in 2016, ahead of the next presidential election. Like Hillary: The Movie, the upcoming film is not expected to be a flattering portrayal of the presumed Democratic candidate for president, though it will primarily explore her life as secretary of state from 2009-13. Hillary: The Movie, on the other hand, was released prior to her appointment to the State Department and was about her roles as first lady of Arkansas, first lady of the U.S. and U.S. Senator from New York. 

"This is why I went to the Supreme Court," Bossie tells The Hollywood Reporter. "Now that I won that case, I can do whatever I want with this new movie. I can advertise it on radio and TV, show it on TV whenever I want to -- all the things they stopped us from doing with Hillary: The Movie." 

At first I thought that perhaps THIS movie was why the Republicans threw such a shit fit over the NBC and CNN versions. You know fear of comparison and all.

However this Bossie guy, if he is to be believed, says that is not accurate.

Bossie said he was partially disappointed that CNN and NBC ditched their projects because he'd have relished the comparisons between what he presumes those networks would have created against what he has in store. 

"NBC was casting Diane Lane as Hillary Clinton. Come on. They were doing everything in their power to make Hillary look good, which is their right," he said. "But ours will not be a puff piece designed to promote a Hillary Clinton presidency."

Yeah I have little doubt this will not be a puff piece. More like a hatchet job.

The good news is that the previous Citizens United films, an anti-Occupy movement film called "Occupied Unmasked" and an anti-Terry McAuliff, film called "Fast Teddy," seem to have garnered little attention, nor had any real impact on their subjects. And personally I don't know ANYBODY who saw "Hillary: The Movie."

(To be honest I always assumed that it had never been released.)

It is also informative to remember that right before the 2012 election their was an anti-Obama film called "2016: Obama's America," which had ABSOLUTELY no impact on the President's reelection bid.

And besides let's face it, Hillary Clinton eats assholes like this David Bossie guy for breakfast. In other words this war on this PARTICULAR woman might find the aggressors running for the hills with their tails between their legs.

CNN accuses Reince Preibus of premature excitation over news that Hillary comes first.

"Oh how cute. The RNC Chairman is already throwing a tantrum about me."

Courtesy of TPM: 

In letters to both CNN and NBC, Republican National Committee Chair Reince Priebus demanded that the networks drop their planned film productions of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton or face losing their partnerships with the RNC for 2016 presidential primary debates. 

"If you have not agreed to pull this programming prior to the start of the RNC's Summer Meeting on August 14, I will seek a binding vote of the RNC stating that the committee will neither partner with you in 2016 primary debates nor sanction primary debates which you sponsor," Preibus wrote. 

While NBC News said it was not involved with their respective project, which is commissioned by NBC Entertainment, CNN's statement to the Huffington Post was much more confrontational: 

"CNN Films, a division of CNN Worldwide, commissioned a documentary about Hillary Clinton earlier this year. It is expected to premiere in 2014 with a theatrical run prior to airing on CNN. This documentary will be a non-fiction look at the life of a former First Lady and Secretary of State. Instead of making premature decisions about a project that is in the very early stages of development and months from completion, we would encourage the members of the Republican National Committee to reserve judgment until they know more. Should they decide not to participate in debates on CNN, we would find it curious, as limiting their debate participation seems to be the ultimate disservice to voters."

Aww is the RNC gonna stomp their feet and bang their head against the wall EVERY TIME somebody pays more attention to Hillary then they do them? Because that will be a lot of head banging.


You know somebody pointed out in the other thread on this topic that the whole reason the country is in the huge mess that it is right now, and the reason why millionaires and billionaires can essentially purchase elections, is because of another Hillary Clinton film from way back in 2008.

You all remember this right?

In January 2008, Citizens United, a nonprofit corporation, released a 90 minute documentary entitled Hillary: The Movie (hereinafter Hillary). The movie expressed opinions about whether then-senator Hillary Clinton, a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, was fit for the presidency. Citizens United distributed the movie in theaters and on DVD, but also wanted to make it available through video-on-demand. It produced advertisements promoting the film and wanted to show them on broadcast and cable television. To pay for the video-on-demand distribution and the advertisements, Citizens United planned to use its general treasury funds.

That case went to the Supreme Court which resulted in the much reviled Citizen's United decision. 

I believe the phrase is "Hoist with your own petard." So if NOW the conservatives want to complain that the deck is stacked against them as they approach 2016, then they have to take responsibility for helping to stack that deck.

Or, they can take their ball and go home. After all WHY frighten away the voters with yet another clown car full of self injuring morons when we all know they don't stand a chance against Hillary anyway?

From Friday night's Real Time, Bill Maher goes after rich assholes for buying influence for GOP.

This from Mediaite:  

Bill Maher ended his show Friday night with a plea to rich liberals to even out the playing field so it’s not just “rich assholes” supporting the GOP pushing the policies they want all over the country. In particular, Maher singled out how one North Carolina businessman has been able to push his agenda through the state legislature, and with just a hint of subtlety, Maher used the segment as a direct appeal to the artist Jay Z, who, as luck would have it, was sitting right next to him.

As muhc as I hate to admit it Maher may have a point.

We would all like to believe that voters cannot be bought, or influenced by loads of money used in advertising to sway our opinions, but the reality before us often shreds that faith in humanity.

Often people only hear the loudest, and most persistent, voice. And the richer you are, the bigger your megaphone.

Bill Moyers:"The poor haven't lost their voice--They can't afford a voice."

You know while we are all watching "The Newsroom" and lamenting the fact that our cable news stations don't display the same level of journalistic integrity, we should remember that we do have a fine representative of that very integrity in Bill Moyers.

We just need to take the time to listen to what he is reporting.

Just a thought.

The Republicans are planning to spend over a billion dollars to defeat President Obama in this election cycle. Can you imagine just how many mouths that kind of money could feed? Or the number of jobs it could provide? Or how many schools it could build?

People are beginning to take notice of the fact that the Republicans are destroying the economy to stop President Obama's reelection.

"The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one term president."

Courtesy of The Guardian:

Why has job creation in America slowed to a crawl? Why, after several months of economic hope, are things suddenly turning sour? The culprits might seem obvious – uncertainty in Europe, an uneven economic recovery, fiscal and monetary policymakers immobilized and incapable of acting. But increasingly, Democrats are making the argument that the real culprit for the country's economic woes lies in a more discrete location: with the Republican Party. 

In recent days, Democrats have started coming out and saying publicly what many have been mumbling privately for years – Republicans are so intent on defeating President Obama for re-election that they are purposely sabotaging the country's economic recovery. These charges are now being levied by Democrats such as Senate majority leader Harry Reid and Obama's key political adviser, David Axelrod. For Democrats, perhaps the most obvious piece of evidence of GOP premeditated malice is the 2010 quote from Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell: 

"The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." 

Such words lead some to the conclusion that Republicans will do anything, including short-circuiting the economy, in order to hurt Obama politically. Considering that presidents – and rarely opposition parties – are held electorally responsible for economic calamity, it's not a bad political strategy. 

As Paul Krugman wrote earlier this week, in the New York Times, while a Democrat rests his head each night in the White House, the United States is currently operating with a Republican economy. After winning the House of Representatives in 2010, the GOP brokered a deal to keep the Bush tax cuts in place, which has reduced the tax burden as a percentage of GDP to its lowest point since Harry Truman sat in the White House. At the insistence of the White House, Congress also agreed to extend unemployment benefits and enact a payroll tax cut – measures that provided a small but important stimulus to the economy, but above all, maintained the key GOP position that taxes must never go up. 

But as Congress giveth, Congress also taketh. The GOP's zealotry on tax cuts is only matched by its zealotry in pursuing austerity policies. In the spring of 2011, federal spending cuts forced by Republican legislators took much-needed money out of the economy: combined with the 2012 budget, it has largely counteracted the positive benefits provided by the 2009 stimulus. 

Subsequently, the GOP's refusal to countenance legislation that would help states with their own fiscal crises (largely, the result of declining tax revenue) has led to massive public sector layoffs at the state and local level. In fact, since Obama took office, state and local governments have shed 611,000 jobs; and by some measures, if not for these jobs, cuts the unemployment rate today would be closer to 7%, not its current 8.2%. In 2010 and 2011, 457,00 public sector jobs were excised; not coincidentally, at the same time, much of the federal stimulus aid from 2009 ran out. And Republicans took over control of Congress. 

These cuts have a larger societal impact. When teachers are laid off, for example (and nearly 200,000 have lost their jobs), it means larger class sizes, other teachers being overworked and after-school classes being cancelled. So, ironically, a policy that is intended to save "our children and grandchildren" from "crushing debt" is leaving them worse-prepared for the actual economic and social challenges they will face in the future. In addition, with states operating under tighter fiscal budgets – and getting no hope relief from Washington – it means less money for essential government services, like help for the elderly, the poor and the disabled.

The truly disgusting part of this treasonous plan by the GOP is that it will work. And it will work for the same reasons that these things ALWAYS work, because the Republicans are better at getting their message out, and fundamentally Americans are too lazy to search for the truth behind the rhetoric.

And with the Citizen United ruling allowing hundreds of millions of corporate dollars to buy up all the available space on the airwaves, the Republican message, peppered with misinformation, deceptively edited soundbites, and outright lies, will be front and center in every American's home day in and day out until election day.

And all that we progressives have on our side, is the truth.

A truth that may be impossible for most voters to see under the mountain of money the Republicans will have at their disposal to bury it.

Well I don't know about you, but I HATE to lose! So let's make sure and spread this information far and wide. Post it on Facebook, talk about it in the carpool, tweet it far and wide, e-mail your family, but whatever you do make sure that people know the truth about who is working to help this country, and who is working to sabotage it!

And remember, some of these people may be Republicans, so make sure to speak s-l-o-w-l-y.

The problem facing us in the upcoming election. And a possible solution from an unlikely source.

This may be a comic, but there is nothing comical about the very real problem facing us in the 2012 elections.

If this were a level playing field the Democrats would mop the floor with the Republicans, but there will be NOTHING fair about how this election pans out.

The Republicans are like the kid who starts running and then yells "GO," or ties your shoelaces together when you're not looking, or "accidentally" trips you at the starting line. In their eyes winning is all that counts and "everything is fair in love, and war."  And OH how they "love" the "war" of politics.

That is why it is of paramount importance for the Obama supporters to get out the vote, and not JUST get it out, but get it out in HUGE numbers. History has shown that the GOP cannot steal an election if there are too many votes on the other side to fudge.

However there might be a little help coming the Democrats way, because as it turns out there seems to be a very aggressive fly in the Republican ointment.

Ron Paul.

He has yet to win a primary. All his other fellow long-shots have dropped out (or will by the end of the day). The Republican National Committee is calling former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney the “presumptive nominee.” 

Yet at state conventions around the country, Paul supporters are increasing the candidate’s support by taking over state party committees and educating fellow Paul fans in arcane rules. 

While at many conventions Romney backers are split between numerous would-be delegates, Paul supporters are showing up in droves and voting with discipline for a delegate slate. 

With a plurality of delegates from five states, Paul supporters could nominate him from the convention floor — the goal of at least some Paul supporters.

It appears that the Ron Paul people are about to give the Republicans a taste of their own bitter medicine, and are actively attempting to undermine the selection of Mitt Romney as the GOP nominee by hook or by crook.  And make no mistake they will NOT be dissuaded, because apparently they see themselves as the saviors of the Republican party.

At least according to this e-mail.

After we take over the Alaska convention, we will be able to nominate Dr. Paul from the floor at the Republican National Convention. We will have a floor fight at the national convention and when it's all said and done, Dr. Paul will be the nominee. Despite what the Republican Party wants us to believe, this election is not about beating Obama. This election is about cleansing the Republican Party. The poor excuse for Americans that support Santorum, Gingrich, and Romney need to be run out of the Republican Party. Once we have cleansed the Republican Party and President Paul is elected, we will end America’s wars of aggression, we will put an end to American imperialism, and we will end the Fed!

So while the Republicans are actively trying to disenfranchise minority voters, Diebold away votes from Obama, and undermine Democracy yet again in his upcoming election, they are also simultaneous struggling to maintain control of their own party and fighting off an insurgency of Ron Paul supporters.

Wow! And we thought the last election cycle was a train wreck!

Nancy Pelosi wants us to "Stop Stephen Colbert." And believe it or not, I agree.

I would love to see this DISCLOSE act passed, and if you feel the same then you can add your name as a citizen co-sponsor by clicking here.