Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

I never met a soldier who didn't want a package.

Posted By: You are wrong on 2005-10-13
In Reply to: Supporting them would be bringing them home, and then there would...sm - Democrat

Bringing them home does not enter into this.  Yet AGAIN you cannot stop your political agenda long enough to think of just the troops.  I know now it is impossible.  We all want them home.  ALL OF US.  It's just that some us would like to make their lives as easy as possible while they are away, and SOME OF US WANT TO SAY THANK YOU. 


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

Evidently you didn't read the package.

Most of the money will not go to the people. So far, I have not come across anything that deals with foreclosures, etc. The item I posted last night from our local newspaper is the so-called stimulus package that will help foreclosures.


Read the doggone bill that they are trying to pass, please. Then you may see the light of day.


That's an Iraqi soldier - not US soldier.
nm
letter from a soldier

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, if you are given this story DO NOT REENLIST!

From: aaronb
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 10:42 PM
To: soldiers@michaelmoore.com
Subject: army con artist

Mr. Moore,

I would like to start by saying that I think what you are doing for the troops is probably the most supportive thing any one human being could do during this troubled time. I would like to tell you my story, and I hope that it can help other soldiers in my position.

I am a specialist in the US Army, I have served four years on active duty, and I am separating from the service later this month. Earlier this year my wife and I had a baby girl. Unfortunately, she was diagnosed with cystic fibrosis, which is a genetic disease which affects the lungs. Her life expectancy is about 30 years old. When she was born she required surgery which kept her in the hospital for about a month. As you can probably imagine, this was quite expensive. I wasn't worried about paying for it because I assumed military insurance (TRICARE) would cover it. I went along with that assumption for the next few months, but about 2 weeks before I was scheduled to ETS, I made a routine trip to the tricare office at the base hospital. When I arrived there and showed them an outstanding bill from the hospital where my daughter had the surgery, which showed an outstanding balance of 127,000 dollars, I was informed that that bill must be paid by me personally because I was required to pay 20% of any medical bill from any hospital or clinic not in the military system. When I asked the clerk what my options were for payment, she informed me that I either pay the bill in full, or reenlist and the bill would be paid for by the army. I couldn't believe what I was hearing, so I left the office without saying another word, went home, and called the 1 800 number for tricare. The representative assured me that the clerks statements were entirely false and that my insurance policy had a catastrophic cap of 1000 dollars. While I have no proof, I believe that the clerk from the office at the hospital (who was a civilian) was receiving some type of payment to try and con soldiers with exceptional family members into reenlisting. I am considering obtaining legal counsel on this matter, but I doubt I have a case. I just wanted to write this to make sure it never happens to anyone else. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, if you are given this story DO NOT REENLIST! Contact the tricare hotline before doing anything based on what you are told. I hope that this has not happened to anyone else, but I fear that is not true.

Thank you for your help,
A soldier for peace


At least one soldier doesn't











src=http://www.armytimes.com/images/aheader_03.jpg
June 06, 2006

Lieutenant defies Army over ‘illegal’ war

By William Cole
The Honolulu Advertiser


In one of the first known cases of its kind, an Army officer from Honolulu is expected to refuse to go to Iraq this month with his unit, citing what he calls the “illegal” and “immoral” basis of the war, his father confirmed.


The officer, 1st Lt. Ehren K. Watada, 28, son of former state campaign spending commission executive director Bob Watada, is believed to be one of the first military officers to publicly take steps to refuse his deployment orders.







Subscribe

“My son has a great deal of courage, and clearly understands what is right, and what is wrong,” Bob Watada said yesterday. “He’s choosing to do the right thing, which is a hard course.”


Watada declined further comment until a news conference planned for 11 a.m. tomorrow at the state Capitol. His son is with a Stryker unit out of Fort Lewis, Wash., and is expected to participate by teleconference.


Jeff Paterson, a former Kaneohe Bay Marine who refused to board a transport in 1990 heading to the Gulf War and now works as an anti-war activist with the organization Not In Our Name, said a second news conference will be held in Tacoma, Wash.


On a Web site Paterson said was created by friends and family, the “Lt.” is quoted as saying: “I refuse to be silent any longer. I refuse to watch families torn apart, while the President tells us to ‘stay the course.’ ... I refuse to be party to an illegal and immoral war against people who did nothing to deserve our aggression. I wanted to be there for my fellow troops. But the best way was not to help drop artillery and cause more death and destruction. It is to help oppose this war and end it so that all soldiers can come home.”


Ehren Watada apparently sought in January to resign his commission, and later asked again and was denied.


Watada, who is not seeking conscientious objector status, but rather has moral objections to the Iraq war, faces the possibility of a court-martial, dishonorable discharge and several years in prison if he refuses the war orders.


According to the GI Rights Hotline, a conscientious objector has a deeply held moral, ethical or religious belief that it is wrong to kill another human being in war.


Some service members discover that opposition after joining the military, and are discharged, the organization said.


Watada doesn’t qualify as a conscientious objector because he does not oppose all wars.


Watada graduated from Hawaii Pacific University in 2003, joined the Army shortly after, went to Officer Candidate School, and incurred a three-year obligation.


The Hawaii man is with the 5th Battalion, 20th Infantry, at Fort Lewis. The unit is part of a larger 3,600-soldier Stryker brigade combat team similar to a unit being developed in Hawaii with about 300 eight-wheeled armored vehicles.


The Fort Lewis brigade is heading to Mosul in northern Iraq, and the soldiers are expected to leave this month and into July.


At a farewell ceremony on Friday, I Corps and Fort Lewis commander Lt. Gen. James Dubik, a former Schofield Barracks commander, said that of 299 million people in the United States, only 2.3 million serve in uniform to defend the nation, the Olympian newspaper reported.


“Less than 1 percent of the nation is carrying 100 percent of the burden of this war,” Dubik said.


But in a sign of increased opposition to the three-year-old Iraq war, anti-war activists demonstrated at the Port of Olympia after Stryker vehicles drove there for shipment, the Olympian reported.


Police used pepper spray on about 100 activists, and 22 people were arrested in one of the more volatile confrontations, the newspaper said.


Paterson, 38, who in 1990 alleged that the Gulf War was about profits and oil in the Middle East and sat down on the tarmac at Kaneohe Bay instead of boarding a transport, said he’s not sure of the number of Iraq or Afghanistan war objectors.


Cases that resulted in court-martial include a Navy sailor sentenced to three months of hard labor for refusing to board a ship headed to the Persian Gulf, a specialist in the National Guard given 120 days in a stand against fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, and a soldier sentenced to 15 months for refusing to deploy to Iraq a second time.


Robert Arakaki, the 83-year-old president of the 100th Infantry Battalion Veterans group, who saw combat in Italy in 1945, yesterday said Watada “owes the country a lot.”


There “should be some kind of good explanation” for why Watada wants out, he said, and Arakaki takes issue with claims of an immoral and illegal war.


“Who determines what is legal or illegal? Him or our government? Not him,” Arakaki said.


Retired Navy Cmdr. Jack Miller, past president of the Hawaii chapter of the Military Officers Association of America, said “there’s always been the problem of following orders. This time is no different.”


“Being a Vietnam veteran, we went through this,” said Miller, 72. “The rest of the load had to be shared by those willing to follow orders and serve their country.”


Dependable, loyal officers are needed, and “if one doesn’t fit that qualification, a bad apple will contaminate the barrel. He (Watada) should be punished in some way,” Miller said. “You don’t want someone over there in Iraq who’s not going to willingly follow orders. That’s dangerous.”




Back to top


coords=11,95,101,112coords=108,95,195,112coords=200,95,309,112coords=316,95,416,112
Copyright © 2006
Use of this site signifies your agreement to the Terms of Service.








Letter from a soldier

Here is an email I received from my cousin.  Thought it interesting enough to put up here.  It is a letter written by a soldier in Afghanistan.


Hello everyone,



As you know I am not a very political person. I just wanted to pass along
that Senator Obama came to Bagram Afghanistan for about an hour on his visit toThe War Zone”. I wanted to share with you what happened.



He got off the plane and got into a bullet proof vehicle, got to the area
to meet with the Major General (2 Star) who is the commander here at Bagram.



As the Soldiers where lined up to shake his hand he blew them off and
didn't say a word as he went into the conference room to meet the General.



As
he finished, the vehicles took him to the Clam Shell (pretty much a big top tent that military personnel can play basketball or work out in with weights) so he could take his publicity pictures playing basketball.  He again shunned the opportunity to talk to Soldiers to thank them for their service.


 


So really he was just here to make a showing for the American's back home that he is their candidate for President.  I think that if you are going to make an effort to come all the way over here you would thank those that are providing the freedom that they are providing for you.


 


I swear we got more thanks from the NBA Basketball Players or the Dallas Cowboy Cheer leaders than from one of the Senators, who wants to be the President of the United States.  I just don't understand how anyone would want him to be our Commander-and-Chief. It was almost that he was scared to be around those that provide the freedom for him and our great country.


 


If this is blunt and to the point I am sorry but I wanted you all to know what kind of caliber of person he really is. What you see in the news is all fake.


 


In service,


CPT Jeffrey S. Porter


Battle Captain


TF Wasatch


American Soldier


 


American by birth


MARINE by the grace of God


Semper Fi


Tell it to the soldier's - see message
I'm posting what THEY say. This is their viewpoint. If you want to believe it is pointless you go tell them. Maybe people should fly over there and say "hey there soldier, what your doing is pointless". Meanwhile they can shout slurs at them like they did to the Vietnam war veterans when they came home. Why don't you tell the people who are fighting to help others (and there are many soldiers who believe in the cause they are fighting for) - you tell them they mean nothing.

How much more insulting can you be towards our soldiers who fight for freedom. The freedoms that many Americans take for granted. It seems people have such little regard for the people who put their lives on the line every day to help other countries and help the world be safer so we don't have a mass build up of more terrorist coming to this country and other countries. Tell it to them not me.
God bless this soldier............sm
and others just like him who have and are sacrificing so much.
When a soldier comes home...

Paste this link or follow the link at the bottom of the post.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKdTUcZLSXw


Soldier's voicemail from Iraq
Hey all, just have a second today but I've been listening to the voicemails and reading the letters from a NG soldier in Iraq and I thought anyone who's interested might like to do the same - this is from a website a friend of the soldier has set up. For some reason it's just really grabbed me. I pray every day for this guy and his unit.

If you like you can listen to his voicemails (one of which was in response to Rove's speech the other day):
**************************
Two more voicemails from Leonard
Bloged in Voicemail by leonard Saturday June 25, 2005

Today, 6/26/05, at 3:30am PST, Leonard left these two recordings. Note his comments on Karl Rove’s latest comments regarding “liberals” aiding “terrorists.” This is a “liberal” that is proud to be one, and he is strapping on armor every day to defend an occupation that was based off a lie. This is one “liberal” taking bullets for this administration.

Click here for the first voicemail today.

Click here for the second voicemail today.
***************************
I'm sure the links won't work here but I post the particular date and note so you can find the messages directly on the website:

http://leonardclark.com/blog/

If you have some time give a listen to what he has to say! I have other friends and family in Iraq myself, but they are not allowed to say much in letters and E-mails and assume that all of it is being read and censored (they don't really mind this, in some cases it is understandable) - but Leonard calls directly and doesn't know how much longer they'll let him do so before they hush him up. IMHO, worth listening to him.

Again happy 4th to all.
Hey, Bush..soldier wants to ask you a few questions
Hey Bush:  Specialist Young Would Also Like to Speak With You...

U.S. Army Specialist Tomas Young has some questions for George W. Bush. He's never met with the Commander-in-Chief who sent him into Sadr City, Iraq in a canvass covered truck...






U.S. Army Specialist Tomas Young has some questions for George W. Bush. He's never met with the Commander-in-Chief who sent him into Sadr City, Iraq in a canvass covered truck during a massive uprising in that city on April 4, 2004. The same city on the same day that Cindy Sheehan's son Casey was killed.

Tomas was lucky. He was only paralyzed from the chest down. Amongst other things he'd like to ask of Bush, is why he won't allow funding for stem cell research which might eventually restore the spine that he lost in Bush's War. A spine which apparently Bush has never had.

Tomas and his new wife Bree (also pictured), came to Crawford from Kansas City on their honeymoon to stand in support of Cindy Sheehan.


Well....buck up little soldier. I think the financial...
well being of the country trumps your party. Oh wait...what am I thinking.
Saw this on a blog, written by a soldier....sm
Apparently written in response to negative posts regarding our country, the election, the republicans, etc. I felt this soldier's viewpoint is very, very important.



I will tell you about America!! I have been a soldier. I have seen American men and women of all RACES and religions that courageously and proudly serve their country. Many of them made the ultimate sacrifice for their country with their lives. I read these comments putting down what these finest of Americans have done It makes me really ANGRY. These people that put our country down have NO appreciation of the freedoms that they have because of the sacrifice of these military heroes!!

I know that in America we have problems and although it has taken along time to fix many of these problems, we still FIX things. That is what Americans do. There have been racial problems but in 1862 there was slavery .A Christian republican president (Lincoln) issued the Emancipation Proclamation that ended the slavery and set our country on the road to racial equality. We are not entirely there yet but we have come a long way. It would have been impossible in years past for a black man like Obama to make 4million dollars a year not to mention actually run for president.

The capitalist system that he is trying to destroy has been really good to him.

I have been around the world and I have seen “civilized” socialist European countries that have a 6o% tax rate on the working class in order to “spread the wealth” and few personal freedoms. I have seen third world countries where one in three babies die due to water born disease. I have also seen American Christian organizations voluntarily drilling wells to help these people survive. I have seen Americans risking their lives to provide medical assistance to people that have no access.

When that enormous tsunami hit Indonesia, Who was there first??? America was there first. American Marines put down their weapons and began digging the out survivors as well as those who didn’t survive. Americans set up water purification units to provide safe drinking water, setting up field hospitals aiding the injured, setting up temporary housing for these victims and food services for the victims. America was there FIRST!!

I have seen countries where the middle class live in filthy squalor, with open sewers and trash in the streets, living under oppressive totalitarian regimes. I have seen communists that plunder, murder, rape and torture the very people that they are supposedly “liberating”.

You people who want to believe that America is so bad really don’t have a realistic view of the world. NOWHERE in the world do people have a higher standard of living due to our capitalist free market system. NOWHERE in the world do people have the personal rights that we have in America. NOBODY in the world puts so much effort in to helping other people, even some that are not very friendly to us. NOBODY matches our humanitarian worldwide efforts. Why do you think that so many people want to get to America????

You people that put America down should really open your eyes and take a good honest look at the rest of the world. You should also question the anti-American rantings of people like Mr. Ayers, Mr. Wright and those associated with them. If these people had spouted this stuff in 90% of
other countries, they would have been thrown in prison or would have wound up in an unmarked shallow grave somewhere. Instead Mr. Wright lives in a 1.2 million dollar home and Mr. Ayers is a professor in a prestigious university.

Again, only in AMERICA…..

WAKE UP AMERICA……WAKE UP!!!!
Try Googling Winter Soldier.
There's a whole other world just waiting for you to discover it that lays just beyond the horizon of the US mainstream media.
Thanks for splaining that to me. I wasn't aware of the soldier
killing fellow soldiers. The sign was disrespectful. But, if you think counterposting disrespect for disrespect solves anything go for it. Just proves both people were/are dead wrong.

This is like, he hit me, well he hit me too. HEHE.
The sicko who shot the army soldier

and murdered him justifies himself by saying it was not a murder; it was a justified killing.......    Our liberal media has been so hush hush about the murder of this solider, maybe they think they same thing!!  They sure have talked about the baby murderer's murder til I'm sick to death of hearing it!!! 


Too bad Obama thought discussing the tiller murder was more important than mentioning a soldier's murder in THIS country due to a sicko islamic convert within our own country....  speaks volumes to me...


The sicko who shot the army soldier

and murdered him justifies himself by saying it was not a murder; it was a justified killing.......    Our liberal media has been so hush hush about the murder of this solider, maybe they think they same thing!!  They sure have talked about the baby murderer's murder til I'm sick to death of hearing it!!! 


Too bad Obama thought discussing the tiller murder was more important than mentioning a soldier's murder in THIS country due to a sicko islamic convert within our own country....  speaks volumes to me...


Yeah, my proud nephew soldier cannot stand
nm
Most of what is in the package O wants

are for PERMANENT jobs; i.e., those jobs will never go away, but they are for jobs that will not help the average person.  We will be paying forever for those jobs.


As I said before, stimulus means jobs, tax cuts, housing fixes, etc. What most of the package contains is stuff that should be in a regular budget. Cut it from 600-something pages down to 4 or 5, or at least 10 at the most, and you have something.


I posted McCain's amendment above.


We lost the first soldier from our small town here in Alabama this week, sm
and there was an article in yesterday's paper about a reverand who was going to protest at the ceremony, but due to community outrange I think this has been halted.
Say it ain't so....Family Upset Over Soldier's Body Arriving As Freight..sm

I hope this family is able to effect a change in this. This would be something worth quitting your job and marching for change.  I'm heartbroken reading of the audacity of the military to ship a fallen soldier as freight.  This has to be a mistake. Pinch me I'm dreaming...Democrat. 


 


Family Upset Over Soldier's Body Arriving As Freight


Bodies Sent To Families On Commercial Airliners



POSTED: 4:46 pm PST December 9, 2005

UPDATED: 10:19 am PST December 12, 2005








There's controversy over how the military is transporting the bodies of service members killed overseas, 10News reported.

A local family said fallen soldiers and Marines deserve better and that one would think our war heroes are being transported with dignity, care and respect. It said one would think upon arrival in their hometowns they are greeted with honor. But unfortunately, the family said that is just not the case.

Dead heroes are supposed to come home with their coffins draped with the American flag -- greeted by a color guard.

But in reality, many are arriving as freight on commercial airliners -- stuffed in the belly of a plane with suitcases and other cargo.















John Holley and his wife, Stacey, were stunned when they found out the body of their only child, Matthew John Holley, who died in Iraq last month, would be arriving at Lindbergh Field as freight.

Matthew was a medic with the 101st Airborne unit and died on Nov. 15.

When someone dies in combat, they need to give them due respect they deserve for (the) sacrifice they made, said John Holley.

John and Stacey Holley, who were both in the Army, made some calls, and with the help of U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, Matthew was greeted with honor and respect.

Our familiarity with military protocol and things of that sort allowed us to kind of put our foot down -- we're not sure other parents have that same knowledge, said Stacey Holley.

The Holleys now want to make sure every fallen hero gets the proper welcome.

The bodies of dead service members arrive at Dover Air Force Base.

From that point, they are sent to their families on commercial airliners.

Reporters from 10News called the Defense Department for an explanation. A representative said she did not know why this is happening.



AWOL soldier surrenders and refusing to go back to Iraq. sm

He is from my neck of the woods.   


http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/awol-soldier-surrenders-after-19-months/20060901041609990017?ncid=NWS00010000000001


stimulus package
Has anyone heard anything about the stimulus stating that if you're white, do not apply?
Stimulus Package

I've read a lot about it on line and decided to get the info from the government itself.


Division B is where the so-called stimulus for us is located. A whole 5 pages or so. The rest is for millions and billions to go to:


Agricultural Research Services, buildings and facilities


Farm Bureau Salaries and Expenses


Natural Conservation Sevices Watershed and flood prevention operations, watershed rehab, fisheries


Rural Development Programs, rural housing services, utilities including distance learning, telemedicine,and broadband program


Bonneville Power Administration


Appropriations Transfer Authority: Department of Energy for `Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy', `Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability', and `Advanced Battery Loan Guarantee Program'


Financial Services: GSA, federal building fund,energy efficient government motor vehicle fleet procurement


Then we come to small businesses. Economic Stimulus LENDING for small businesses. 


Shall I keep going or does everybody get the jist of this so-called stimulus package?


 


 


Stimulus package, etc.
I absolutely agree with you.  You are 150% right.
For the original package...(sm)
but unsure if it will help as it stands.  The popularity of the against vote for the bill has been fascilitated by some keen advertising on the pub side.  I'm hoping Obama will call the pubs out on tonight's address and point out exactly what it is that pubs want in the bill (more tax breaks for the wealthy that we can't afford), and in particular, which pubs want it.  If he does that keep your eye on the polls.  People will be outraged.
It's done. He just signed the package.
Got a kick out the guy who owns a small business out there. So young and employs 55 people in 3 years. He mispronounced Biden's name and everybody laughed. I don't think he realized what he did. He was nervous.
The O also voted for the bailout package. (nm)
x
Boooo... stimulus package
Is anyone else not happy about this stimulus package? 
Stimulus Package breakdown
I know some of you don't like Glen Beck, but he has broken it down by the numbers and provides links so you can check the facts yourself. It sounds okay until you get to the heading: "When is the money going to be spent, and on what?"

 

 

 

 

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/20639/

I've read too much about this package

and it will not help the people that need help.  It doesn't provide help to the regular "joe's" out there that need help. It is all about the greed again. Most of it will only help regular "joe's" by the year 2011, not now.  By that time, we will either be down the tubes or everything will have corrected itself on its own.


I don't think government should meddle in ways to try to turn the economy around. It only mkes it worse. Look at all the handouts in the first stimulus package. Did the regular "joe's" get any help out of it? Nope. It will be the same with this one. Did you see Glen Beck's breakdown on the package posted below? If not, I suggest you look at it or else I can post it here.


It goes to show that the democrats don't give a darn about us, just their agenda even though 11 democrats voted against it. That has to say something.  Evidently, the democrats (and I don't mean this harshly) didn't get enough calls from their constiuents to knock this package into oblivion. They were in a hurry to pass it? Why? Not because it would help us, but because they wanted it passed before anyone really got a chance to see what it entailed.


Sorry, but I disagree with you whole heartedly. This will not help. It will only hurt. This will take our dollars down to zero and the next thing you know, we will be taking wheelbarrows of money to the store to buy a loaf of bread if you can even find it in the stores.


 


 


 


I've been taking the package apart.

I see no jobs for this area.


In fact, 2 years ago, they turned a whole mountain into windmills. Who has those jobs? The company that put them there. Their guys come from another state to maintain and repair them. No locals are employed by that company. Doesn't make sense but that's the way they do it.


 


Stimulus package -- what the pubs want..(sm)
http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=pete%20sessions%20taliban&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wv#
Poll: Are you for or against the stim package?
I am against it.
Stimulus package could be hazardous to your

health.  Take a look at this little hidden jewel.


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&refer=columnist_mccaughey&sid=aLzfDxfbwhzs


Mythbusting the Obama Recovery Package
Sorry for the c/p, but I could not get the link take from ourfuture.org, but this is one of the most complete rebuttals I have seen in defense of the proposed program.

1. The proposed recovery package is too big.

False. Most progressive economists agree (and Paul Krugman is downright emphatic) that it's going to take a minimum of a trillion dollars of well-placed investment to pull our economy out of this ditch. This is no time for half-measures, blue-ribbon committees, pilot projects, or trial balloons: this is a life-or-death crisis that requires immediate and massive intervention.

CAF Senior Fellow Bernie Horn puts it this way: "The American economy is huge and it’s at a standstill. It’s like a motionless 100-car freight train—or one going backwards slowly. A small locomotive simply can’t pull it forward. We need an engine large enough to work, one that can create millions of jobs. If anything, a $775 billion 2-year plan may be too small rather than too big."

Dean Baker of the Center for Economic and Policy Research echoed this same thing on Rachel Maddow's show last Tuesday night. It's got to be big. And it's got to be now. Anything too small—or too late—and the American economy will be at serious risk of stagnating the same way Japan's did in the 1990s.

2. If we can't afford (insert pet project here), we certainly can't afford this.

Yes, we can. What we really can't afford is a huge recession that undercuts the tax base. That's a vicious cycle that will make it increasingly harder to dig out the longer this goes on. The Congressional Budget Office projects that the current slowdown will cost the federal government $166 billion in lost tax revenues in 2009—a number that could easily get even larger in coming years if we fall into a real depression. If we get on that trendline, we could lose a trillion dollars in government revenues by the end of Obama's first term. We need to invest what we have while we still have it if we hope to have a strong economy going forward.

This argument is based on the limited view that wealth is mainly generated by loaning or borrowing at interest—a common enough assumption among financial people over the past 30 years. A more progressive view is that real wealth is generated by labor, combined with access to resources required for production. Putting people to work creates wealth. So does ensuring that our current failing energy regime is replaced as rapidly as possible with one that's infinitely renewable and that we will finally be in full control of. And so do other kinds of infrastructure investments, which form the footing on which a new round of businesses can rise and thrive.

Businesses have always invested their capital to create more capital. The best parts of Obama's proposal involve getting the government to do the same thing. Conservatives are resisting this because don't believe that there's such a thing as the common wealth—which is how they've rationalized their plundering of our common assets. We need to make it absolutely clear that we do believe in the common wealth—and that their assaults on everything that allows America to generate national wealth are going stop, right here and right now.

3. It's more important to balance the budget. Fix that, and the rest will take care of itself.

Read history much? Herbert Hoover is history's poster boy for the idea that balancing the budget during a recession is the best way known to turn it into a full-on depression. And that wasn't a one-off: FDR repeated the lesson in 1937, when he succumbed to the pleas of budget-hawk conservatives and tried to balance the budget—a move that put the brakes on what had, until then, been a solid recovery.

Looking forward, this year's numbers also show the case clearly. Economists are already estimating that spending by individuals and businesses will be off by $300 to $500 billion in 2009. The upshot of this will be millions of lost jobs, which in turn will mean even lower spending and more job losses next year as the country accelerates toward depression.

The only way to halt this slide is for the government to step in and fill the hole with an additional $300 billion-$500 billion of its own spending—and to spend that money on investments that will create as many jobs as possible. The longer we wait, the more government spending it will ultimately take to pull us out of this—and the less able we'll be to muster that much cash.

Balanced budgets are important, but not as important right now as making sure every American has a paycheck they can count on. We can't afford to sacrifice the fate of the entire country to this one economic ideal.

4. The worst thing we can possibly do is raise taxes. Or borrow the money, God forbid.

More misplaced priorities.

As for taxes: Obama's already told us, without apologies to anyone, that he plans to raise taxes on people making over $250,000 a year—the people who've profited most from our current high levels of inequality. Practically, it makes sense to raise taxes on the affluent, since they're increasingly the only ones left who actually have any money. And morally, it's only fair that those who've gained the most from conservative mismanagement of the economy (regardless of their own political leanings) should be the first to pay the bills for it.

As for borrowing: Don't look now, but the whole planet is reeling from financial problems as least as big as ours. Even in the midst of this colossal fiscal mess we're in, if you're an individual, business, or government with excess capital to store somewhere, the USA is still the safest place on earth to park it.

They're so eager for our American brand of low-risk investment that they're even willing to lend their cash to us at interest rates that are very close to zero (and may actually turn out to be less than zero, once you add in inflation). If someone offered you the chance to borrow massive amounts of money without paying interest, you'd do it, right? Well, that money's already sitting on the table, just waiting for us to put it to work jump-starting our economy again. We'd be fools not to take it.

5. When you want to stimulate the economy, tax cuts always beat government spending hands-down.

Another conservative fantasy that disintegrates on contact with reality.

The chart that shows the effectiveness of various forms of government stimulus, based on recent attempts, is here. (Conservatives will be infuriated to learn that food stamps come out on top, generating $1.73 for every dollar spent. Infrastructure investments come in a respectable third. The bottom half of the chart is wall-to-wall tax cut schemes.)

The problem with tax cuts is that people don't spend them in ways that get the economy moving. The Wall Street Journal reports that only 10 to 20 percent of the money remanded to taxpayers in the 2008 tax rebate actually got spent. The other 80 to 90 percent ended up in people's personal savings, were used to pay off creditors, or were simply absorbed by inflation and higher living costs.

Knowing this, we're a bit dismayed Obama is proposing to sink as much as 40 percent of his stimulus package into tax cuts. That's too much, if you ask us. But at least they're targeted at the middle class—people who are more likely to spend that money here in the U.S., rather than ship it off to investments abroad.

6. Large-scale government investment would inevitably turn into an orgy of waste, fraud and abuse.

True—but only if we let conservatives run the show.

The fact is that all human endeavors—from running a household to running a nation—entail a fair amount of waste, fraud and abuse. Bad decisions get made. Greed gets the better of people. Not everybody is as honest as we'd wish them to be.

But in spite of that truth, nobody in history can top the Americans when it comes to planning and executing successful large-scale investment projects. (A thousand years from now, that's what they'll be saying about us: Not always smart about foreign policy, but man, could those people think big—and they usually pulled it off, too.) In our happier past, good management, careful oversight, and clear accountability have always gone a long way toward preventing really big problems, and ensured that we got the most for our collective buck.

Unfortunately, if we've learned anything about conservatives at this late date, it's that they'll defang or dismantle these mechanisms every chance they get. They think rules are for lesser mortals, oversight is a form of Big Brother-style oppression, and accountability is for people who can't afford lobbyists and lawyers. I don't think anyone would even try argue any more that when it comes to waste, fraud, and abuse, conservatives are the hands-down experts.

What's ironic is that they're now offering edifying moral guidance to the rest of us on the subject. All you can do is point and giggle at the stupefying hypocrisy of it all.

7. We need stimulus now—and tax cuts are the only way to get the money out there fast enough.

Not really, no. Much of the infrastructure spending in the recovery package will be targeted at projects that are “shovel ready”—the ones that are planned, approved, and sitting on the shelf ready to go as soon as there's money to fund them. Some of these could start generating jobs as early as April or May.

Some of this money will also be aimed at covering state budget deficits. That money will also be spent immediately on things like health care, child-care programs and other underfunded state services that employ large numbers of people.

That's a lot of direct funding that will put people to work quickly—quite likely, faster than giving people tax cuts and letting them trickle out through the economy.

8. It’s wrong to bail out spend-thrift states. Let them stimulate their own damned economies.

Please. Haven't we all had a lifetime bellyfull of tax revolutionaries and drown-the-government-in-the-bathtub crazies? I swear...can't live with 'em, can't just shoot 'em....

States aren't in trouble because they overspent their allowances. Almost every state constitution in the country requires that the government balance its budget every single year. You want fiscal sanity? Anybody who's put in their time in state government knows all about it. They've made the hard choices, and faced the consequences, too.

The problem is that the recession has undercut state tax revenues to the point where these governments can no longer afford to cover their obligations—some of which (like bonds) were taken on years ago, when times were better. Commitments that were fiscally prudent by any measure back then are wiping them out now. Budgets that were balanced and sound when they were first outlined a couple years ago are impossible monsters today.

And, unlike the federal government, the states can't deficit spend their way out of it. That's why they need federal help.

9. This whole Keynesian thing has been totally disproved. It didn’t work during the Depression. It didn’t work for Japan in the 1980s.

Say what? We know that rewriting history is a favorite conservative pastime. America is Christian country. Slavery was good for black people. Bush was never a real conservative. Saddam was in cahoots with al-Qaida. And on it goes.

The campaign to discredit Keynes (which is directly traceable to the Heritage Foundation) is a new and rather audacious fiction—one that leaves both progressive and conservative economists as gobsmacked and sputtering as scientists get when you bring up "intelligent design." And the factual basis for it is, if anything, even more specious.

Paul Krugman addresses both the Depression and the example of Japan in his new book, "The Return of Depression Economics." According to his telling of the tale, in both cases the affected economies strengthened as long as the government continued to infuse capital into them; but bobbled when there was enough improvement that the budget hawks could get some political traction. When the spending flagged, so did the recovery. In Japan, bold steps alternating with repeated failures of nerve created a liquidity trap that stagnated the country's economy through most of the 1990s.

Keynes' prescription has worked everywhere it's been tried—as long as governments acted boldly and quickly enough. It's not medicine that works if you take it in half-doses, or quit before the course of treatment is finished. In fact, doing it with less than full commitment can actually make the situation worse.

10. This is a partisan program that's designed to promote the Democratic agenda.

No. Almost every businessperson in America—including the conservative ones—are stepping forward in support of the stimulus package. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is on board with it. So (unsurprisingly) are most of the building trades and engineering groups who stand to prosper with a new round of infrastructure spending. The current economy is hurting everyone, regardless of political affiliation—and most Americans agree that it's time for the government to step in and get things going again.
 TAKE ACTION 

Write your member of Congress to ask for passage of a bold economic recovery plan now.

And Yes. I've written before about the way this kind of investment in the health and well-being of the middle class can, in the end, transform long-held conservative beliefs about how the economy should work. A stimulus package that works will prove that government can do important things that no other entity can do; that it can act effectively in the public interest; and that there's actually such a thing as a national common good that deserves to be protected. In short, it will reaffirm progressive values in a way that's irrefutable, and will earn the enduring respect of the country.


Healthcare provision in stimulus package
Apparently this was added in at the last minute by an unknown.  I heard bits and pieces about this today in between working, but never really got the whole story.  Did anyone get the whole story?
The recovery package will address, in part,
The stimulus bill is a separate issue.
Congress now looking at THIRD stimulus package...yippie!!! More of .
))
True to their newest stand, right wing blogger smears family of murdered soldier.

Predictably, falling right in line with Tony Snow and his *2,500 is a number* statement on June 15, followed one day later by the fiercely *patriotic* Rush *I'dLoveToServeMyCountryButCan'tBecauseOfThisPimpleOnMyButt* Limbaugh, reminding them that aborted fetuses are more important than murdered American soldiers (as was posted on the *other* board on June 16), all the while publicly declaring that all liberals who post on this board don't care about our troops.  *Profound* indeed.


http://www.prospect.org/horsesmouth/2006/06/post_134.html#002858 


The Horse's Mouth
A blog about the reporting of politics -- and the politics of reporting. By Greg Sargent






« | Main | »






WINGNUT JOHN HINDERAKER SMEARS DEAD SOLDIER'S UNCLE. A couple of minutes ago I came across this Associated Press story saying that the uncle of Kristian Menchaca -- one of the U.S. soldiers who was missing and is now said to be dead -- criticized the United States for Menchaca's disappearance and death. My first thought was to do a post asking how long it would take before the wingnuts started smearing the grief-stricken uncle.


Alas, I'm too late. Over at Powerline Blog, John Hinderaker has already cranked up the slime machine and let fly:


In a sick coda, Menchaca's uncle, Ken MacKenzie, appeared on the Today show and recited weirdly inapplicable Democratic Party talking points in relation to his own nephew's death...No shame.


I've asked this before, but what is it about the relatives of people killed by terrorists that these wingnuts hate so much? Recall that Ann Coulter smeared the widows of 9/11 victims and that many righty bloggers smeared the father of Nick Berg, who was beheaded in Iraq. Their sin, of course, was that they criticized America and George Bush.


Let me put this as clearly as I can: To the likes of Hinderaker, the pain of those who lost loved ones to this war only matters to the extent that the bereaved allow their grief to be used to prop up the war effort and Bush himself. If the bereaved relatives don't allow their grief to be used in this fashion, their sacrifice and loss no longer matter a whit -- they're not to be pitied or empathized with, but scorned and humiliated as brutally as possible. Despicable.


--Greg Sargent




Exxon CEO's retirement package and talks of reform..sm


 


Senator rips ex Exxon CEO's retirement package






By Tom Doggett Tue Apr 18, 4:53 PM ET



WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Amid record oil prices and soaring gasoline costs, Exxon Mobil's $400 million retirement package to its former CEO is a shameful display of greed that should be reviewed by Congress and investigated by federal regulators, Democratic Sen. Byron Dorgan (news, bio, voting record) said on Tuesday.








Dorgan said he wants Exxon Mobil officials to appear at a Senate Commerce Committee hearing to explain how the corporation justifies giving its former boss, Lee Raymond, such a huge retirement package.


He also said the

Securities and Exchange Commission should investigate the deal that appears to shortchange shareholders.


There can be no more compelling evidence that the price gouging and market manipulation which has produced record oil prices is out of control, and is working to serve the forces of individual greed and corporate gluttony at the painful expense of millions of American consumers, Dorgan said.


Dorgan's criticism of Raymond's financial package came on the same day that U.S. crude oil prices hit a record high of more than $71 a barrel at the New York Mercantile Exchange.


Higher crude oil prices are helping to push of up gasoline costs. The Energy Department reported prices jumped 10 cents over the last week to a national average of $2.78 a gallon, up 55 cents from a year ago.



President George W. Bush said on Tuesday he was concerned about the impact high gasoline prices were having on families and businesses.


Exxon earned the wrath of many lawmakers when it reported more than $36 billion in profits last year as energy prices paid by consumers soared.


Dorgan said he will push to win passage of his legislation that would impose a windfall profits tax on big oil companies and rebate that money to consumers, unless the companies used their earnings to explore for and produce more energy.


I think a sensible public policy would insist that the big oil companies either invest those windfall profits in things that will increase our own domestic energy supplies, or we should return some of that money to consumers, Dorgan said.


Using them to drop $400 million dollars in the pocket of a big oil executive is simply unacceptable, he added.


Exxon Mobil has defended Raymond's retirement package, saying it was pegged to the rise in the company's profit and market capitalization that occurred during his tenure.


This was a package that both the dems and pubs thought would pass
We need something done with the stock market hitting bottom.
Obama’s Stimulus Package: A Pricey Experiment ..sm
I am especially concerned with the question and comparison regards to homeowners in the second to the last paragraph.





Obama’s Stimulus Package: A Pricey Experiment

By Andrea Tantaros
Republican Political Commentator/FOXNews.com Contributor

President-elect Barack Obama is prepping to jam another massive stimulus plan down our throats. Lately the president-elect has been hitting the media circuit to sell this monstrosity and each time he launches into his pitch he proves that what he lacks in actual specifics he makes up for in vocabulary. But is this bloated bill just a ruse for another big, federally funded bailout for struggling states?
Obama

According to Obama, his road and sewer stimulus package would pump billions into things like “infrastructure” and “green jobs.” Wait a minute, nobody is saying that the failure to spend over $700 billion on roads and sewers created this mess, and no one saying that new sewers will get us out of it. Obama has insisted that we must invest in what works. How do we know green jobs will work and provide a return? We don’t. And it’s quite a pricey experiment to find out.

What’s most troubling is the notion that more taxpayer money is heading right for states that are in the red. Just a few weeks ago, governors and mayors made their way to Washington, DC to hound Obama for a handout. Now mayors across America have submitted over 11,000 proposals for some bailout cash including one to fund a mob museum in Vegas. Talk about a real gamble in Sin City. Is Tony “The Ant” Spilotro really our best bet?

Take New York for example, a state that’s in financial ruin. The Empire State is facing a $15 billion budget deficit. Why would we encourage a state that spent itself into disaster to spend more? There are workers already repairing sewers and roads around the Big Apple and America. Will Obama give money that will be spent on existing jobs or hire thousands of new sewer workers?

According to Obama, “only government can break the vicious cycles that are crippling our economy…where an inability to lend and borrow stops growth and leads to even less credit.” What our future president doesn’t understand is that the vicious cycles were caused by the government through the creation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and the refusal to regulate, in part because there was a belief that a regulation would prevent the prosperity associated with owning a home. How do we expect government to be part of the solution? According to CNBC we have allocated 7 trillion to fix our economic crisis and there is $300 billion currently left in TARP. Is that not enough?

Obama is refusing to ask the same question that homeowners didn’t answer when the mortgage mess was going on: Can we afford to borrow this money? At some point we are mortgaging our national security by letting developing countries buy our debt. The more we spend the less we have to spend on our national defense. What if China develops a distaste for buying our debt? Maybe refusing to borrow more money might be the best thing for us. Sort of like the way parents cut off a frivolous child’s allowance.

On the campaign trail Obama campaigned for balanced budgets. This might be his first broken promise. While we wait to hear answers about what this massive deficit spending will do to our currency, to inflation and to our national security even Obama admits that his recovery plan alone will not solve all the problems that led us into this crisis. (So why are we doing it??) I’ll tell you what, for a trillion dollars, it better.



http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/01/13/tantaros_stimulus/
You are completely skipping the part about the stimulus package
It is on his own blog! How is that fair in the least little bit? So because my husband is a white construction worker who has worked hard ALL his life, payed his way through college without taking out loans or borrowing money (it took him six years to graduate because he was working and taking classes) took out a mortgage that he could handle, yet now due to the housing crisis and economic crisis is getting the short end of the stick, just because he is white he shouldn't be included in this package?

And someone attacked me earlier for being racist and saying that maybe he just wasn't the "best candidate" for a position. I think I can 100% say it didn't matter if he was the "best candidate," it mattered that he wasn't a minority.

This is so out of line. There is no such thing as EQUALITY. Never will be.
The real story is that this is supposed to be a stimulus package.
I can see from your post how this would help save states money over time, but how would it help stimulate the economy now? It wouldn't and that's why people are so upset.
The real story is that this is supposed to be a stimulus package.
I can see from your post how this would help save states money over time, but how would it help stimulate the economy now? It wouldn't and that's why people are so upset. Even Obama has said that if it doesn't create a job or save a job, it doesn't belong in there.
Obama hopes the stimulus package is large
How is paying for somebody's birth control gonna produce jobs or a 20 MILLION dollar minor league baseball museum, 20 million dollars at a zoo, OR 1.5 million to reduce prostitution in Ohio?   This is nothing but a pork barrel project.........isn't that what Obama said he WOULD DO AWAY WITH?  All pork barrel spending?  What a joke!
Kinda makes me rethink the whole stimulus package........
Evidently Pickens Plan was incorporated in there..........as much as it was allowed!
I just recieved a package back in the mail OPENED AND EMPTY...
with a letter from the postoffice asking what it was I mailed off so they can search for it. Never had this happen before.


With the stimulus package there are built in tax credits for small businesses and SBA...sm
I have worked in retail as an assistant buyer and see their profit margins...and I know there are many legit, honest, mom and pop stores, but they usually make up for it by hiring school kids for slave wages and also family members. I am talking about across the board, in factories, retail, hospitalitiy, techno, every sector, these workers would all be paying more EACH WEEK into the the tax stucture in this country, strengtheing our reserves, becomeing consumers themselves because they can finally afford something....I feel like I dropped from another planet here, or industry in MT is not the norm by far.
Liar, liar - Sen. Dodd Admits Adding Bonus Provision to Stimulus Package


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/03/18/sen-dodd-admits-adding-bonus-provision-stimulus-package/100days/


I didn't miss any part and didn't say...
anything either way. I just posted a link.