Taking Care of Business

(Here is the latest from candidate for governor, Matt Dunne: – promoted by GMD)

Anyone who says the economy is doing fine in Vermont isn’t talking to the same Vermonters I am.

Since 2003, the number of new businesses in Vermont has dropped every single year. Jobs are being lost in all sectors and in all parts of the state and there has been no leadership shown in Montpelier to turn our economy around.

Nobody knows the challenges of operating a company in Vermont better than today’s business leaders. They are on the front-lines trying to convince Vermont students graduating from our state colleges and universities to stay and work in Vermont. They are working to attract new investments to grow their companies and have dealt with the unresponsive and non-transparent bureaucracy in Montpelier. It is these entrepreneurs and executives who know what kind of leadership is necessary in Vermont and what types of changes need to be enacted to make business more successful here.

Earlier this week, we entered an exciting new phase of our campaign by releasing the names of 26 business leaders who are endorsing the campaign. As the only candidate to have worked in multiple companies in Vermont, I was honored to have support from so many of my peers.

Will Raap, Chairman of The Earth Partners and Founder of Gardener's Supply and Mike Lane, Chief Operating Officer of Dealer.com joined me at an event in Winooski to announce these endorsements. As business leaders, they recognize that this next election will determine where we go as a state, not just for the next year or two, but for the next several decades. The next Governor must not only understand our challenges, but actually have the experience to deliver on the promise of a better economy.

Will and Mike joined 24 others in endorsing the campaign, including:

 

Clay Adams – Resource Systems Group, Inc., Windsor
Bob Allen – VT Country Store/Direct Marketing Assoc., Bennington
Kevin Bowie – Shearer Honda, Rutland
Jay Canning – Courtyard by Marriott Burlington Harbor, Chittenden
Laura Carlsmith – EatingWell Media Group, Chittenden
Alan Cummings – Seldon Tech, Windsor
Ty Danco – Stromatech, Inc., Chittenden
Robert Davis – Stromatec, Inc., Chittenden
Rob Downey – American Flatbread, Chittenden
Brian Dunkiel – Shems Dunkiel Raubvogul & Saunders, Chittenden
Paul Growald – Growald & Company, Chittenden
Jim Hand – Bennington
John Illick – ReArch, Inc. and VT Technology Park, Chittenden
Charlie Kireker – Twin Birches, Ltd., Addison
Mike Lane – Dealer.com, Chittenden
Krista Lincoln – KCL, Inc., Addison
Michael McKenna – James Farm Creative, Addison
Hinda Miller – Vermont State Senator/Jogbra, Chittenden
Matt Mole – Mole Consulting, Addison
Lawrence Mott  – New Generation Partners, Addison
Leslie Nulty – Focal Point Advisory Services, Chittenden
Will Patten – Formerly of Ben and Jerry's, Chittenden
Will Raap – The Earth Partners and Founder Gardener's Supply, Chittenden
Miranda and Charlie Shackleton – ShackletonThomas, Windsor
Meg Smith – Meg Smith & Co., Chittenden
Miro Weinberger – The Hartland Group, Chittenden

To read more about these endorsements please visit my website atwww.MattDunne.com.

Time for some prosecutions

At last! Thanks to the Supreme Court we now have a tool to prosecute people in the United States who are financing terrorism in the Middle East.

You may have heard of the Supreme Court's recent decision in Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project.

Under the law, 

It is a federal crime to “knowingly provid[e] material support or resources to a foreign terrorist organization.” 18 U. S. C. §2339B(a)(1). The authority to designate an entity a “foreign terrorist organization” rests with the Secretary of State, and is subject to judicial review. “[T]he term 'material support or resources' means any property, tangible or intangible, or service, including currency or monetary instruments or financial securities, financial services, lodging, training, expert advice or assistance, safehouses, false documentation or identification, communications equipment, facilities, weapons, lethal substances, explosives, personnel (1 or more individuals who may be or include oneself), and transportation, except medicine or religious materials.” §2339A(b)(1).

The Supreme Court, in one of its last decisions this term, held that Americans who provide aid to organizations that engage in terrorist activities can be criminally prosecuted for violating this law, even if the assistance they provide is designated to support humanitarian, not terrorist, activities.

This week the Times published an investigation of American assistance to terrorist activities in the Middle East, but I suspect we won't be seeing prosecutions any time soon. 

As the American government seeks to end the four-decade Jewish settlement enterprise and foster a Palestinian state in the West Bank, the American Treasury helps sustain the settlements through tax breaks on donations to support them.

A New York Times examination of public records in the United States and Israel identified at least 40 American groups that have collected more than $200 million in tax-deductible gifts for Jewish settlement in the West Bank and East Jerusalem over the last decade. The money goes mostly to schools, synagogues, recreation centers and the like, legitimate expenditures under the tax law. But it has also paid for more legally questionable commodities: housing as well as guard dogs, bulletproof vests, rifle scopes and vehicles to secure outposts deep in occupied areas.

That's right: Americans are getting tax deductions for giving money to support the terrorist activities of the Israeli government: building settlements in occupied territories and maintaining what Jimmy Carter has rightly characterized as a system of apartheid in the occupied territories.

The outposts receiving tax-deductible donations — distinct from established settlements financed by Israel’s government — are illegal under Israeli law. And a decade ago, Israel ended tax breaks for contributions to groups devoted exclusively to settlement-building in the West Bank.

So tell me: Is the United States really opposed to terrorism, or do our allies get a break on that?

We know who's making the contributions because they're claiming an income tax deduction. Somehow, though, I suspect we shouldn't hold our breath waiting for the first prosecution.

Susan Bartlett takes the pledge

Here’s the 2nd clip of the Susan Bartlett interview. Summertime and the living is busy, and I’ve been lagging on getting these posts up. So Susan is enjoying an extended spotlight. I will post the last clip next week if anyone’s keeping score at home at this point.

The clip opens with Susan’s confidence that we will achieve universal health care coverage in this state. In taking the internet pledge, she makes the great point that negative campaigning tends not to work in Vermont.  

A review of the legislative session follows. Dealing with the deficit, restructuring the judiciary, and closing Vermont Yankee were all major accomplishments. In terms of energy, she explains how we will be better off changing our energy mix and focussing on efficiency. And on a similar note of optimism, her assessment of our budget woes is that ultimately our troubles will move us towards outcomes-based government restructuring, which will improve services.

Part 1 is HERE

Stay tuned for Part 3.

[Note: No endorsement implied. Just continuing the VTblogosphereTV tradition of showcasing the qualities of the guest.]

Susan Bartlett’s campaign website

Volunteer

Contribute

HomeGrownVT

(Promoted as part of our ongoing policy to promote 1st person pieces by major candidates for statewide office in Vermont. – promoted by JulieWaters)

When I released JumpstartVT—my jobs and efficiency plan for Vermont, I said that my focus would be on the 23,000 Vermonters out of work and on keeping our state the best place to live, work and raise a family.

We have had Vermonters from across the state and editors from the largest papers in the state telling me a plan is exactly what Vermont needs and that my plan is a great start.

I agree that it was a start. Today, I continued to show Vermonters I will create jobs as governor and do the right thing when it comes to our energy future.

In JumpstartVT, I laid out the beginning of my energy plan.  We are at an energy crossroads with contracts for 2/3 of Vermont’s electricity expiring within 5 years, an aging nuclear power plant, and some of the oldest and least energy efficient housing stock in the country.  We send more than 2 billion dollars out of state because we only supply 10% of our energy from local production.

As governor, I will provide the strong leadership we need to ensure Vermonters have access to clean, safe, secure and affordable energy today and into the future.  Not only will I make sure we are investing in energy efficiency – removing barriers for Vermonters to retrofit their homes and businesses, but I will also create incentives for businesses and families to invest in renewable energy.

My energy plan is not just good for the planet but it is also good for our pocketbooks because investments in energy efficiency and in renewable energy will create jobs for Vermonters and will help support Vermont businesses who manufacture clean energy technology.

Today, I want to announce an important component of this plan: HomeGrownVT.  HomeGrownVT would exempt alternative energy sources from property taxes.   Other states – like Montana and Florida have implemented such a policy and have seen great results. In Vermont, this initiative will help grow clean energy manufacturing jobs and will make it possible for more Vermonters to invest in renewable energy to save money, help us move off of fossil fuel and take control of our energy future.

I know Vermont needs to grow jobs and to do that we need to start making things again. In JumpStartVt my economic development vision is to focus first on helping Vermont’s existing businesses succeed and grow.  This is a change from the Dubie/Douglas approach of focusing on trying to poach the next husky or IBM from another state.

The clean energy manufacturing sector offers these Vermont businesses a great chance to grow, while enabling Vermonters to save money, lower energy costs and reduce our carbon footprint

HomeGrownVT would lower taxes by exempting solar hot water systems, wind-generated electricity, biomass facilities and other renewable energy sources from consideration when assessing a home or business’ value for property tax purposes.

Today, Vermonters adding green technology to their homes, offices and factories often find that their property taxes have increased because  the newly-installed green technology has increased the value of their property. Under my plan these hidden tax increases would end. The exemption would last for up to 10 years.

We need to create the right incentives for job creation and energy savings. Taxing someone for doing the right thing and contributing to the economy is wrong.

Sunward is a great example of how Vermonters can save money, invest in the economy and have a real impact on carbon emissions. Sunward sells a typical solar-powered water-heating unit for about $6,200. Vermonters can receive up to $2,700 in federal and state credits to offset this cost. If just 10 percent of Vermont homes (24,000) installed this type of system each house would reduce their energy bills by $500, reduce their carbon emissions by 20 percent and contribute nearly $155 million to our state’s economy.

I think it is interesting to note that The Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst estimates that 16.7 jobs are created for every $1 million invested in clean energy technologies. This could mean thousands of new jobs for Vermonters in clean energy manufacturing, installation and other related fields.

My energy plan will also raise Vermont’s ranking among renewable energy producers nationwide. Vermont currently ranks 41st for electricity derived from renewable energy, producing only 1,110 MWH.That is just not good enough, especially when our neighbors like New Hampshire ranks 28th (2,389 MHW) and Maine ranks 8th (7,945 MWH).

My plan to encourage new energy projects will grow jobs, increase our affordable renewable energy portfolio and relieve the financial burden homeowners and businesses face when investing in clean energy technologies. This is the type of forward thinking and planning Vermont needs in its next governor.

Get ready for the whitewash

UPDATE: According to the Times Argus, he is planning on suing the city.

 

We know what to expect, don't we?

Once again, the Barre Police have assaulted a harmless, unarmed person with their Tasers, this time in the context of what they referred to, apparently without embarrassment, as a “welfare check”.

I guess they determined that the welfare of a human being is adversely affected by the introduction of 50,000 volts.

Then, once they took the guy down using their Tasers they did what any self-respecting police department would do: they arrested him and charged him with disorderly conduct. After all, the police would never let someone get away with being assaulted and injured by the police without charging him with something, right?

This time the judge wouldn't hear of it. At a preliminary hearing this week district Judge Brian Grearson threw out the charges, concluding that there was no evidence that the injured victim's behavior amounted to disorderly conduct, even though State's Attorney Tom Kelly argued valiantly that yelling was enough.

Grearson listened carefully as States Attorney Tom Kelly repeatedly attempted to make the case that Magoon engaged in either “violent, threatening, or tumultuous behavior” during a brief confrontation that stemmed from a report he was carrying a knife and might be suicidal.

Although Kelly conceded that Magoon complied with a police request that he drop the backpack he was carrying at the time and never actually threatened any of the three officers on the scene, he insisted there were grounds for the criminal charge

“At the very least his behavior was tumultuous,” Kelly said, suggesting Magoon's alleged shouting in a public place was enough to clear that bar.

Not according to Grearson.

“Anything other than yelling?” the judge asked.

 What comes next? Well, now that the charges have been dismissed the victim's lawyer indicates that he is likely to sue the Barre police.

In addition, as with the incident earlier this year, we can expect that the Barre Police Department will conduct an investigation and conclude that its officers were blameless and acted in conformity with the Taser policy.

But what about this: How about taking these deadly weapons away from the police? they've already shown that they can't be trusted with them.

I support Doug Racine for Governor.

Please note: this diary represents my own personal opinion and should not be construed to represent, in any way, a consensus opinion by GMD.

Someone asked last week when the GMD admins were going to come right out and say who we each  are supporting for Governor.  It’s a fair question.  I’ve had a “Doug Racine” bumper sticker on my car for a couple of months, so I guess this is as good a time as any to offer my opinion (for what it’s worth.)

First of all, I am not a Democrat.   I tack a little too much to the left to be entirely comfortable in the Democratic corral.  That being said, even if a qualified Progressive had entered the race, I would still be supporting Doug because I think he is the right person for the job.  I have to say that my “short list” includes Matt Dunne, and it is my fondest wish that he will run for Lieutenant Governor.  I’m not going to denigrate the other  Democratic candidates, any one of which would make a significantly better Governor than Brian Dubie.

I first met Doug when he was serving on the board of the Vermont Natural Resources Council.  He struck me immediately as a sincere and engaged individual with a genuine commitment to Vermont’s environment.  That he was a business owner/operator, making time to serve on the board of such an organization impressed me further.  

When Doug made a preliminary visit this year to St. Albans, on January 24, I still intended to keep an open mind and assess all of the candidates before committing to the Racine campaign.  Doug spent quite a while visiting with all of the individuals who gathered at Cosmic Bakery to hear him speak that day.  In his general remarks and one-on-one conversations, he was relaxed and informal, putting everyone at ease. He spoke passionately about many issues, but especially about education and healthcare, which I believe remain high on his list of priorities.

I am confident that Matt Dunne shares the high-ground with Doug with regard to all of the issues that are important to me.  I was also very impressed with Matt on my first encounter with him when he visited Hudak Farm in St. Albans.  Matt has made the imperative to finally bring broadband to every corner of the state his signature issue, and promises to reinvigorate Vermont’s economic future through technological dexterity.  He brings very impressive business credentials to the table in support of this claim and I do not doubt his ability to effectively make the case for his priorities.

Doug also recognizes the importance of finally getting Vermont’s IT capabilities up to 21st Century standards; and Matt is committed to education, socially responsible service solutions, and universal healthcare, just as Doug is.  One key difference is in the strategy for moving Vermont toward universal coverage.   Like me, Matt firmly believes that a “single payor” system should be the choice to provide that universal coverage.  Doug has successfully introduced legislation to begin our advance toward universal coverage with a comparative study of three different healthcare systems, including but not limited to a single-payor model.

Why then, you might wonder, have I chosen Doug over Matt?  The answer boils down to personal style, and who I think has the best overall potential for effectively competing in this election and then delivering on an overall Vermont-friendly and socially responsible agenda as Governor.

I can see Matt as very appealing to younger voters, but I think he is a little “glossy” for older ones.  His eyes shine when he speaks about the technological future and his experiences at Google.  I get that he represents the future, and I am confident that I will be campaigning hard for him for Governor sometime in the not-so-distant future; but I think his message may be a bit before its time among Vermont’s traditional voter base.  Doug’s relaxed personal style and more nuanced fluency with all the issues that are important to Vermonters will stand him well in the upcoming campaign against Dubie.  Dubie won’t even be able to bounce a rock off of him when it comes to the question of who is better connected with Vermont’s business community, despite the fact that that has been a traditional Republican stronghold.  As the Free Press pointed out today, Douglas’ personal history is the very essence of small business success in Vermont.

And as far as his efforts in the legislature with regard to universal healthcare are concerned, I see that as a demonstration of effective consensus-building skills by someone who knows that a nudge in the right direction can lead down a more direct path to the desired goal than a demand for full-investment in that goal at the start of the journey.  For a governor to be effective he must have a capacity for pragmatism in his bag of tricks.  

I found the bitter comments by Republican strategist Jim Barnett, in today’s Free Press feature rather telling.  I took away from them the impression that there is a lot of anxiety among the Dubie block  about the possibility of having to face Doug Racine in the General.  As if I needed any more persuasion, this added to my certainty that Doug Racine is our man.

Entergy Nuclear reduces strontium in fish!

Dan Barlow at the Herald makes the catch:

Fish taken from the Vernon pool had 70 picocuries per kilogram of the isotope, the Health Department said. Fish taken about five miles upstream near the Route 9 bridge had findings of 100 picocuries pr kilogram.

The state said the normal “background” levels for strontium-90 are between 120-360 picocuries per kilogram. Officials typically test the bones of fish – referred to as the “inedible portions” of the fish in the Health Department’s release – because that is where the isotope collects.

(Emphasis added.)

http://rutlandherald.com/artic…

Snark alert!

Over the next 20 years, if ENVY is relicensed, Vermont could become a leader in fish laundering, importing toxin-filled fish to swim in the Vernon pool until their strontium 90 levels are reduced. Thanks, Entergy!

Green jobs!

Why is the Associated Press pretending Dem/Prog Auditor candidate Hoffer doesn’t exist?

Elections – Auditor: Doug Hoffer is one of the three or four highest profile policy analysts in the state. He is also a Democratic Party candidate for the position of Auditor. To that end, he has received the high profile endorsements of the Vermont State Employees Association and the Vermont AFL-CIO. His candidacy has been covered by the Vermont News Bureau, WPTZ, and others.

And yet, to Reporter Wilson Ring of the Associated Press, he apparently does not exist.

Ring’s piece in today’s papers makes no mention whatsoever of Hoffer, casting the race entirely as a run between incumbent Republican Tom Salmon and former Auditor and State Senator Ed Flanagan. There is no customary “if Flanagan emerges as the Democratic nominee…” or “Flanagan faces analyst Doug Hoffer in the Democratic primary…” whatsoever. Flanagan is simply presented as the Democratic Party alternative without qualification.

Flanagan, of course, had been repeatedly urged by just about everyone of note in the Democratic community not to run, given his recent scandal in Burlington, and his run is seen by many as borne of a desire to demonstrate political relevance, rather than a desire for a return to the position. Most do not consider him to be a viable candidate, even against the vulnerable, erratic incumbent.

Even if the intent of the article was to exclusively focus on a possible matchup between the current and former Auditors, leaving out any mention of Flanagan’s primary rival – especially one garnering so much institutional support – leaves the impression there is no such rival, and that’s journalistically irresponsible. In fact, the bold headline on the Times Argus front page reading simply “Salmon vs. Flanagan” gives the snubbing of Hoffer a decidedly in-your-face, aggressive feel.

It’s also quite peculiar. Logically speaking, there are only two broad possibilities as to the reason for such an omission. Ring is either ignorant of Hoffer’s candidacy, or he deliberately chose to leave him out of his coverage of the race. Neither possibility reflects well on the author.

Steele May Have Doomed His Leadership of GOP With Remarks on War in Afghanistan

Several Top Conservatives Demand GOP Chairman Resign Over Remarks Made at Party Fundraiser That ‘The One Thing You Don’t Do Is Engage in a Land War in Afghanistan’ Even As He Criticizes Obama — Ignoring the Fact That the President Inherited the War From Bush and That Steele’s Own Party Pushed for More Troops to be Sent There in the First Place

Michael Steele Picture

WILL HE STAY OR WILL HE GO? — Ever since Michael Steele was elected chairman of the Republican National Committee 18 months ago, party conservatives have sought to undermine his leadership almost from day one. Now they are openly calling for Steele to resign after the chairman made remarks during a GOP fundraiser last week in which he called into question the U.S. war effort in Afghanistan, even as he criticized President Obama’s handling of it. “If he’s [the president] such a student of history, has he not understood that . . . the one thing you don’t do, is engage in a land war in Afghanistan,” Steele said, “because everyone who has tried over a thousand years of history has failed.” (Photo: Getty Images)

(Posted 5:00 a.m. EDT Tuesday, July 6, 2010)

By SKEETER SANDERS

Poor Michael Steele. No matter what he says or does, hard-line conservatives — both inside and outside the Republican Party — simply won’t cut the GOP National Committee chairman any slack.

Ever since Steele was elected the party’s first black national chairman 18 months ago, conservatives — who never wanted him to be chairman in the first place — have sought to undermine his authority.

Now, several prominent conservatives have called on Steele to resign after a video surfaced Thursday of remarks the RNC chairman made the day before during a GOP fundraiser in Connecticut, in which Steele called into question the U.S. war effort in Afghanistan — even as he criticized President Obama’s handling of it.

AFGHANISTAN WAR — INHERITED FROM BUSH — ‘A WAR OF OBAMA’S CHOOSING,’ STEELE SAYS

Responding to an attendee’s question about Obama relieving General Stanley McChrystal of his command of NATO forces in Afghanistan after the general made disparaging remarks about administration officials in an interview with Rolling Stone magazine, Steele called McChrystal’s firing “very comical.”

McChrystal was replaced by General David Petraeus, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq.

McChrystal’s dismissal is “a reflection of the frustration that a lot of our military leaders have with this administration and their prosecution of the war in Afghanistan,” Steele said. “Keep in mind again, federal candidates, this was a war of Obama’s choosing. This is not something the United States had actively prosecuted or wanted to engage in.”

Oh, really?

It seems that Steele has forgotten the fact that the war in Afghanistan is one that Obama inherited from his predecessor, George W. Bush, who sent U.S. forces to Afghanistan to root out al-Qaida and its Taliban hosts two months after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, in which al-Qaida operatives hijacked four commercial jetliners and slammed them into New York’s World Trade Canter and the Pentagon across the Potomac from the nation’s capital, destroying the twin towers, damaging the Defense Department’s headquarters — and killing over 3,300 people in the process.

Had passengers aboard the fourth hijacked jet headed to Washington not fought to take back control of the plane — a struggle that ultimately sent it plunging into a field in Pennsylvania — the hijackers would have likely slammed that plane into either the White House or the Capitol Building.

GOP CHAIRMAN: U.S. SHOULD NOT ‘ENGAGE IN A LAND WAR IN AFGHANISTAN’

For Steele to say that the war in Afghanistan — which pre-dates Obama’s presidency by nearly eight years — is “a war of Obama’s choosing” is ludicrous. But that’s not what’s gotten Steele in trouble with conservatives in his party.

“It was the president who was trying to be cute by half by flipping a script demonizing [the war in] Iraq, while saying the battle really should be in Afghanistan,” Steele said. “Well, if he’s [Obama] such a student of history, has he not understood that, you know, that’s the one thing you don’t do, is engage in a land war in Afghanistan?”

Steele went on: “All right, because everyone who has tried, over a thousand years of history [From Ghengis Khan to the Soviet Union], has failed. And there are reasons for that. There are other ways to engage in Afghanistan.”

It is those remarks — that the U.S. should not “engage in a land war in Afghanistan” — that has Steele in hot water with conservatives. After all, Republicans had pushed Obama last fall to heed General  McChrystal’s request for a “surge” of 40,000 troops in Afghanistan — double the number of American forces that Bush sent in the controversial Iraq “surge” two years earlier.

By Friday, Steele was in full damage-control mode. In a statement issued through the RNC, the embattled chairman said, “As we have learned throughout history, winning a war in Afghanistan is a difficult task. We must also remember that after the tragedy of September 11, 2001, it is also a necessary one. That is why I supported the decision to increase our troop force and, like the entire United States Senate, I support General Petraeus’ confirmation. The stakes are too high for us to accept anything but success in Afghanistan.”  

GOP SENATORS RIP STEELE ON SUNDAY TV TALK SHOWS

Steele’s clarification on Friday, however, failed to stem the criticism, as top Republicans continued to blast the chairman in appearances on the TV talk-show circuit Sunday.

Senator John McCain (R-Arizona), the 2008 GOP presidential nominee — who is himself locked in a fight for his political survival against J.D. Hayworth, a right-wing radio talk-show host, in the August 24 primary — blasted Steele’s remarks as “wildly inaccurate.”

Appearing via satellite from Afghanistan on ABC’s “This Week,” McCain stopped short of calling for Steele’s resignation, but did say that he thought “Mr. Steele is going to have to assess as to whether he can still lead the Republican Party as chairman of the Republican National Committee.”

Also in Afghanistan over the Independence Day weekend, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) told CBS’ “Face The Nation” that he was “dismayed, angry, upset” at Steele. “It was an uninformed, unnecessary, unwise, untimely comment,” Graham said.

“If you’re a student of history, you would know that America cannot afford to allow Afghanistan to go back into Taliban control,” Graham continued. “We’re not here fighting a ground war to occupy this country. We’re here to help Afghans who can live in peace with us.”

RON PAUL COMES TO STEELE’S DEFENSE; RAND PAUL CONSPICUOUSLY SILENT

Not all Republicans were voicing anger at Steele, however. Representative Ron Paul (R-Texas), who ran for president as the Libertarian Party nominee in 1988 and unsuccessfully sought the 2008 GOP presidential nomination, issued a statement Sunday in which he voiced his support for the embattled GOP chairman for speaking out against the war.

“I would like to congratulate Michael Steele for his leadership on one of the most important issues of today,” Paul said. “He is absolutely right: Afghanistan is now Obama’s war. During the 2008 campaign, Obama was out in front in insisting that more troops be sent to Afghanistan. Obama called for expanding the war even as he pretended to be a peace candidate.”

Paul called on Steele to stay on as RNC chairman. “Smart policies make smart politics,” Paul said. “He [Steele] is guiding the party in the right direction and we are on the verge of victory this fall. Chairman Steele should not back off. He is giving the country, especially young people, hope as he speaks truth about this war.”

Later on Sunday, the Texas Republican, appearing on CNN, asserted that the war in Afghanistan “truly is Obama’s war,” even as he acknowledged that it began during Bush’s presidency.

“Obama said, ‘This is the good war’ and he’s expanded the war, but the American people aren’t with him,” Paul said. “The majority of the American people are tired of the war and they want to see it ended. They want to see our troops brought home.”  

Significantly, there has so far been no comment from Rand Paul, the Tea Party movement-backed GOP nominee for the U.S. Senate seat in Kentucky being vacated by the retiring Jim Bunning, and son of the Texas congressman. Steele had sharply criticized the younger Paul in May after the Kentuckian said that he opposed the anti-discrimination provisions of the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act being imposed on private businesses.

Steele said Rand Paul’s libertarian views on the role of government and civil rights “got in the way of reality, and the reality of it is that was important legislation at the time, put in place important benchmarks for the progress of free people.” He called the GOP Senate nominee’s remarks “misplaced in these times” and that they were out of step with the rest of the country.

STEELE HAS NEVER BEEN LIKED BY CONSERVATIVES FROM DAY ONE

That conservatives have heaped scorn on Steele in the wake of his remarks on Afghanistan should surprise no one. The episode is only the latest in an ongoing soap opera in which the right wing has  attacked Steele relentlessly ever since he announced his candidacy for the RNC chairmanship after the party suffered a drubbing in the 2008 election.

The race for the GOP’s top post was a bitterly-fought contest that was riven with charges of racism, prompting Bob Bennett, an RNC member and former chairman of the Ohio GOP, to brand it “the dirtiest [campaign for the party leadership] ever.”  Bennett was a staunch supporter of the RNC chairman Steele defeated, Mike Duncan, who sought a second two-year term.

Steele was forced to face down vicious accusations by right-wing party hard-liners — often anonymously — that he did not possess a true conservative philosophy and that he was actually a social liberal.

Only hours before they were to begin voting for the RNC’s next chairman, the Republican National Committee’s 168 members found fliers that had been slipped under their Washington hotel-room doors depicting a partially unfurled roll of bathroom tissue with an accusatory headline: “Soft is fine for toilet paper, but not for a chairman of the Republican National Committee!”

The fliers cited Steele’s past association with the Republican Leadership Council, which he co-founded with former New Jersey Governor Christie Todd Whitman. A moderate who served as the head of the federal Environmental Protection Agency during former President George W. Bush’s first term, Whitman’s outspoken support for abortion rights infuriated many social conservatives.

Shortly after Steele announced his candidacy for the party chairmanship, his photograph and all mention of him as a founder of the Republican Leadership Council disappeared from the RLC’s Web site.

Among the RLC’s members include the Log Cabin Republicans, an association of openly gay Republicans which strongly supports expanding civil rights protections for gays. Steele said he had “joined” the council only to reach out to liberals as a conservative and help “unite the party.”

James Bopp Jr., a conservative RNC member from Indiana, issued an e-mail to other committee members in which he openly accused Steele of lying about his relationship with the RLC.

CONSERVATIVES CLASH WITH STEELE OVER PARTY FUNDRAISING, SPENDING

In the spring of last year, party conservatives forced Steele to agree to accept restraints on his control of millions of dollars in party funds and contracts — an unprecedented curb on the powers of the RNC chairman, who, until then, had enjoyed almost unrestricted authority over how to spend the party’s funds.

In January of this year, Steele was accused by two of his predecessors of attempting to personally profit from his speaking engagements at colleges, trade associations and other groups, raking in as much as $20,000 in honorariums, or speaking fees.

“I’ve never heard of a chairman of either party ever taking money for speeches,” former RNC chairman Frank Fahrenkopf said in an interview with the right-wing daily The Washington Times at the time. “The job of a national chairman is to give speeches. That’s what the national party pays him for.”

Fahrenkopf’s criticism of Steele was echoed by former RNC chairman Jim Nicholson, who told the Times that the job “demands so much of your time that you can work 24/7 and not get everything done, so taking time out to speak for the benefit of one’s own bank account is not appropriate.”

As chairman, Steele earns an annual salary of $223,500.

STEELE NOW FACING OPEN RIGHT-WING CHALLENGE TO HIS LEADERSHIP

As the GOP’s right wing — including a chorus of neoconservatives led by William Kristol, founder and editor of the Weekly Standard who is also a board member of the of the right-wing foreign-policy think tank Keep America Safe, and Liz Cheney, the think tank’s co-founder and chairman  — demand Steele’s immediate resignation, Steele is likely to face an all-out right-wing challenge if he decides to stay on and seek a second two-year term next January.

North Dakota GOP Chairman Gary Emineth, a social conservative, is stepping down to prepare to run against Steele for the RNC chairmanship after the November midterm elections, according to The Washington Times.

Emineth insisted, however, that he intended to challenge Steele for the chairmanship for the RNC’s loss of financial support from major donors during Steele’s tenure. “I was shocked at the last RNC meeting to learn how little money we got from our major donors,” the Times quoted Emineth as saying.

Regardless of Emineth’s motives, there is little doubt now that Steele’s future as the national chairman of the Republican Party is on the line. The question is whether the embattled chairman will step down now or fight to keep his job. Either way, the GOP now faces a major internal mess that — because Steele is the party’s first black chairman — potentially could get very ugly, the last thing the GOP needs just four months before the November election.

# # #

Copyright 2010, Skeeter Sanders. All rights reserved.

Fiscal Fail 101

Yup, thanks to BP, we all had to see it. In case any of you were still wondering, conservatives really do think this way:

The poor do spend out of proportion on cigarettes and on lottery tickets and in the cold calculations of the state, that is a good thing.  The cigarette companies hand over billions to state governments and the lottery, as we are constantly reminded, helps fund education.



Here we go . . .

Image Source,Photobucket Uploader Firefox Extension

Another Driftglass original

Once more for fun . . .

The poor spend a lot of their money on cigarettes and lottery tickets, which floods our State treasuries and funds education, respectively.

Of course that fiscal analysis is complete bullshit. But, for the sake arrogance and the self-satisfaction gained from shitting on the less fortunate, let’s assume this conservative tripe holds water. So what does it really say when conservatives claim that the great unwashed’s cigarettes are good for balance sheets and their gambling is good for education?

Well, it works like this. First take the “poor’s” disproportionate education contribution, throw in the hefty cigarette taxes they fire into the General Fund (remember, this doesn’t actually happen, but let’s humor the Tigernistas). Next, top it all off with a regressive 17% FICA shell game (now that‘s painfully true). So here is what that inane, apologetic observation really tells us about those “poor” and what the Tigernistas are actually highlighting is:

The poor “pay a disproportionate amount on taxes.”

The poor “pay a disproportionate amount of the overall upkeep of our State.”  

The poor “do spend out of proportion” due to their heavy burden of subsidizing the wealthy.

& from further upstream in the comments to Julie’s post on CVPS’s Piss.On.The.Poor.Party, we are told that maybe it’s “hard” for the folks at CVPS who receive:

. . . $465,285.00 per year [giving them] different sets of lifestyle choices [than smoking menthols or buy scratch tickets].

Here is the problem, and this is what regressive conservative fiscal mismanagement and conservative economic malpractice committed against the U.S. economy has done for a generation now. Show me a working family making $46,525.50 a year, and I’ll show you a working family that pays out a greater proportion of their income, in taxes & infrastructure upkeep, than does an attorney making $465,285.00.

Workers who earn less than approx. $100K annually – in 2010 dollars – have subsidized the ultra wealthy since Reagan and a conservative Congress imposed the FICA flat-tax. This 17% is a flat-tax on wages that only working people/middle class families pay. The Millionaire/Billionaire set pay a negligible amount of this tax – if any – on their annual resources. Shit, even dead people don’t pay this tax – only working people do.

This is problematic on many levels. Regardless of its intent, the FICA Flat Tax has been economically disastrous to the U.S. economy and it has played a government enforced role in decimating the middle class. For the past 25 years, the result of this approach to taxing wages has been a massive transfer of wealth, from an entire generation of workers, to the wealthiest persons and corporations in the world.

The huge surpluses paid into the alleged FICA/Social Security “Trust” fund by the middle class has justified massive tax breaks for corporations and the ultra-wealthy. The trillion$ in FICA working class taxes have been transferred to and used to subsidize the wealthiest U.S. citizens. These middle class and working class government enforced welfare payments to the wealthy have also been used to hide the magnitude of the U.S. budget deficit, hide the need to cut programs benefiting the wealthy and/or the theft of the middle’s class’s social security taxes has protected the wealthy from paying their fair share of taxes to support the services and government in the same way that the middle class and working poor have been forced to do.

Conservatives have used the FICA Social Security “surplus” as a worker generated trough to lather trillion$ in bailouts and bonuses to bankers, to $hell out trillion$ more in defense contractor welfare and to grease Big Oil with $ub$idizes that will drag down the U.S. economy for decades to come.

The result of this has been a massive transfer of wealth from workers to bankers/defense contractors and industries that have systematically destroyed the U.S. economy.  

So whether it’s a lottery scam in Vermont or a FICA transfer out of D.C., the Poor have the privilege of paying more than the Privileged have the obligation to pay.

************************************************

Oh, and BTW Mr. Empathy Patrolman, the issue was never about attorneys “worrying about being sensitive.” No one is dialing 911-Empathy Squad.  The issue is whether an attorney, representing a State protected utility monopoly, who happens to be

(1) charged by his client with

(2) championing a billing policy at

(3) the expense of poor people  

(4) in front of a regulatory agency, could

(5) tell the difference between

— (A) being a relevant and effective advocate; as opposed to

— (B) being ineffective, irrelevant and an asshole.

Guess what? The jury came back on the question of effective advocacy with an unambiguous verdict. Even CVPS’s President and its Gen. Counsel – the clients – called the attorney’s advocacy “careless and insensitive conduct.”

Blah, blah, blah, . . . “the poor do spend out of proportion on cigarettes and on lottery tickets” — so, speaking of being an effective advocate vs. being an irrelevant asshole . . .