but more a trance. Freaks me out. Thanks for the statements you posted. This is not a normal election, but more of a movement. Hope it will not be like it was in the 60's with riots going on. Getting more and more like the Book of Revelations. A person who will deceive the nations with persuasive language and have massive christ-like appeal and people will flock to him as he will promise false hope and world peace, but destroys everything. FREAKS ME OUT. He keeps changing his mind and now he and his campaign want to try to kill the expectations of what he has been stating for months. Beyond creepy. This is not your normal every four year election.
Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread
that liberals get a HUGE PASS when it comes to verbal spillage. I've heard some of the most hateful things come out of Howard Dean and all we hear about is what Karl Rove said, and a lot of it was taken out of context. He didn't say ALL Democrats, he said SOME liberals, i.e. Move On.Org and George Soros. There WERE groups demonstrating against the war in Afghanistan. That was a fact. And how does the Democratic party get by with a former KKK member (Byrd)? That wouldn't be allowed for 2 seconds on the Republican side.
You should try to relax. Music always helps me. Try this. LOL.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjXyqcx-mYY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBk32JsV9l8
Reality
You obviously saw Senator John Ensign (R-NV) on Meet The Press this morning along with Congressman Barney Frank (not Barney Fife). Ensign says that Frank is "fearmongering" and says that state budgets are "bloated" and that we should be "cutting back."
Well, how's your state doing, Senator Ensign? The state of Nevada has to cut 38% from its state budget. The Nevada schools are facing a 15% cut. Outpatient oncology services at University Medical Center in Las Vegas have CLOSED because of state Medicaid cuts. If you're lucky, maybe your gynecologic oncologist will open a chemotherapy center in his clinic's storage room like Dr. Nick Spirtos did.
That's only one example. Do yourself a favor and read the article. There are plenty more examples in plenty of other states. The idea that states need to "cut back" in the midst of a recession is absolutely idiotic and so is Senator Ensign.
Reality?
The majority of voters in the United States have dismissed your idea of reality and voted against it. Maybe it is you who needs to get a cup of coffee and join the majority.
This is reality Reality
Reality and Glenn Beck have nothing to do with each other.
You are the one not dealing in reality
there's so many wrong statements in your post I wouldn't know where to begin in rebutting them... I pity you and your pessimistic outlook on our country. You are one very bitter and jaded person. Just like Cindy Sheehan who has to blame someone else for her life's problems. I'm sorry her mother had a stroke, and I hope that everything is okay, but I think Cindy Sheehan needs to take this as a sign to take care of her family that is living...which I'm glad she is doing right now for the sake of her mother.
Reality check
You just cannot stay off this board can you? Don't you get it? We don't want to debate with you. We are just as set in our beliefs as you are in yours. No one here is interested in anything you have to say, so please, get a life or at least stay on your own board.
For Reality Check. sm
I think my post did sound a little hateful. I am sure you are a very nice person. You see, this is a country divided, and I am certain I am not the only one on this board, to feel that GWB has had a lot to do with that. Like I said, I am sure you are a nice person. However, this is a country divided, nothing will make me change my mind about this administration. I fear for either party that gets in next time, if it is a democrat, they cannot hardly get ahead because of the blunders made by the current administration. In a nutshell, I sincerely feel like this country has never been more divided, and perhaps that is why the moderators decided to split the two boards to begin with. Post all you want, you will get no more nasty responses for me. I however will feel at liberty to post jokes when I feel like it. I lurk on the conservative board, but do not post. There are many right-winged jokes and cartoons over there and I do not post my opinion - because that is their board.
Reality check.
October 2001 to February 2003. That’s how long it took to sell the war to Congress, democrats and republicans alike, and to the American public, according to Colonel Sam Gardiner (USAF, Ret.). Not some left-wing wacko. Just a high-rank retired Air Force colonel who conducted a study.
A Strategy of Lies: How the White House Fed the Public a Steady Diet of Falsehoods
http://www.rense.com/general44/50.htm.
The power of propaganda. They bought it, hook, line and sinker. That was then and this is now, and what we know NOW is that Bush lied. No WMDs. No Iraq-sponsored terrorism. It's still about the oil.
BTW, there is a Bechtel-commissioned BTC pipeline in Georgia, "secured" by US troops, who also provide advisors and training to Georgia military. Russia doesn't like US-trained troops in its backyard either. You won't hear it on Fox, but Russia has not confined it's invasion to Ossetia. They targeted that pipeline 18 hours ago. Sometimes you follow the money. Other times, you follow the oil.
Fox News, YouTube, nohussein.org? Consider the source. Abortion is legal. The issue is choice. Some choose not to do it, others choose to exercise their right to choose. Those who do appreciate any politician who is willing to go to the mat to uphold Roe vs Wade. Unlikely to be reversed anytime soon and, in this election, far down on the list of priorities. Reality check #2.
No need to wonder what the colonel would have to say about that uranium since the issue was extensively scrutinized in his study.
It has been known for decades that Iraq had a reactor at Tuwaitha Nuclear Research Center and a nuclear materials testing facility at Osiraq, damaged in a bombing by the Iranians in 1980 and disabled by Israeli air attacks in 1981 in an operation that was condemned by the US at the time since we were backing Saddam against Iran. Ten years later, these same facilities were completely destroyed by Americans in the 1991 Gulf War, 12 years before Bush sold his version of Gulf War II to the American public.
This would be the same 500 metric tons of reactor grade uranium (the kind used as fuel in producing clean electricity). It was NOT weapons grade uranium. Being well documented by the UN and the IAEA, this stash of uranium was legal and had been controlled and monitored in accordance with international law since the Gulf War. The uranium was removed from Iraq and transported to Canada to be used in their nuclear energy facilities. The inspections team found NO EVIDENCE of any yellowcake in Iraq dating from after 1991. So if the terrorists had managed to get their hands on it, the US would be held accountable since they destroyed the reactor, knew about the stock piles, returned to occupy Iraq in 2003, but were too busy killing Iraqis to bother with disposing of the uranium for 5 full years. No wonder they were keeping it a secret.
Speaking of yellowcake uranium and propaganda, back in January 2003, Bush accused Saddam of trying to buy it from Niger, based on Italian, British and French intelligence sources. Notice this occurred between October 2001 and February 2003, as stated in the previous post, when Bush was busy doing anything and everything he could to dupe the Congress and public into supporting his war. The polite word for this intelligence is “faulty.” A more accurate description would be forgery. The colonel talks about this too, but his study is a bit obscure and hard to locate. Google Niger uranium and Iraq and this link pops up in case anybody wants to read more about that one.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niger_uranium_forgeries
As for the chemical and biological weapons used against his own people, that would be the Kurdish town of Halabja in March 1988, when 7000 civilians died and in 14 other Kurd villages. The reason we knew about those chemical and biological weapons is because the US sold them to Saddam to use against the Iranians (as did the UK, Germany, France and others). Check out the Senate committee's reports on US Chemical and Biological Warfare-Related Dual-Use Exports to Iraq from a 1992 report. Reagan and Bush Sr. sold Iraq anthrax, VX nerve gas, West Nile fever germs, botulism, germs similar to tuberculosis and pneumonia, Salmonella, E. coli, brucella melitensis, which damages major organs, and clostridium perfringens, which causes gas gangrene, to name a few.
From 1991 to 1998 UNSCOM inspected and scoured Iraq, accounting for some 95+% of the known agents before they left. Despite all the suspicions put forth by the Bush propaganda machine in 2003 and the best search efforts of the US since the occupation, no evidence of the remaining inventory has been uncovered.
Like it or not, abortion has been legal in the US for 35 years. The answer to your questions about choice is simple. It’s the mother’s body, not yours, not the government’s. Her choice. Nobody’s else’s. That is the law. The law does not force abortion for those who do not believe in it, nor does it prevent it for those who do. Morality can be legislated after the American theocracy has been established. Until then, it is about choice.
Bush’s contempt for the courts is no secret. They do not simply uphold law. They also interpret it and have discretionary authority to issue decisions and opinions. The constitution provides us with 3 executive branches for a reason. It’s called checks and balances. No candidate or president should be opposed to seeing that part of the constitution upheld. Running From Reality
If there was one pre-eminent characteristic of the Republican convention this week, it was the quality of deception. Words completely lost their meaning. Reality was turned upside down.
From the faux populist gibberish mouthed by speaker after speaker, you would never have known that the Republicans have been in power over the past several years and used that titanic power to lead the country to its present sorry state.
Summary On the defensive over the extent of multiple McCain homes, the GOP candidate strikes back. But his TV spot gives an oversimplified and misleading account of how Obama bought his own $1.6 million house in Chicago.
The ad says Chicago power broker Tony Rezko got "political favors" including "$14 million from taxpayers." But there's no evidence of any connection to the Obama home purchase. The $14 million was to build apartments for low-income seniors. Obama wrote a letter supporting the "worthy" project, but both men say Rezko didn't ask for the letter.
It says Rezko "purchased part of the property [Obama] couldn't afford." Rezko's wife did buy an adjoining tract but later sold the land at a profit. Obama paid market price for his home.
McCain launched the attack after Obama ran one capitalizing on McCain's inability to recall for an interviewer how many homes the McCains own. Obama's ad says it's seven. The best tally we've seen puts the figure at eight, counting all the apartments and homes owned by McCain's wife, Cindy, and various family trusts, for themselves and their children.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/154782
REALITY? Do you know who deregulated
xx
You need a dose of reality.
nm
EU reality check....
1. Member states in the EU all maintain their separate set of laws. Members of the EU Parliament are elected every 5 years by all citizens of the EU. It operates in much the same way as the US federal system.
2. Member states are responsible for their own defense. Many, but not all, are members of NATO (by choice). Nascent EU military forces (as opposed to separate national forces) have engaged in peacekeeping missions and humanitarian aid missions in Africa, the former Yugoslavia and in the Middle East.
3. Each member state maintains it's own legal system. EU laws are analogous to our US federal laws. No threat here. As a matter of fact, national sovereignty is stronger under this system than states' rights are in the US. EU law mainly relates to enforcement of treaties, the environment and fundamental rights of member states.
4. 15 of the 27 EU countries have adopted the euro....again, by choice: Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia and Spain. I hate to break this to you, but the Euro already is worth more than the US dollar (1 Euro = 1.2652 US dollars)....they must be doing something right.
5. The EU has PROGRESSIVE policy oversight on it's own agriculture, energy and infrastructure (as it should be) and is competitive in world markets based on the value of their currency...again, higher in value than the US dollar.
No need to "research" the NAU. I know what it is and I know what it is not. The NAU is a THEORETICAL region. It does not exist. There are no current government plans in Canada, the US or Mexico to form such an entity. NAFTA is the closest manifestation of the CONCEPT of an NAU.
Your version of the NAU is nothing more to me than a conspiracy theory...paranoia on a grand scale. I have a few questions for you. Ever heard of evolution. How about survival of the fittest? Do you believe in these concepts? Here's the deal. The world we live in now is not the same world your parents and grandparents grew up in...especially in terms of population and technology. The survival of the human race and of the nations depends upon their ability to adapt and CHANGE. IF (and I emphasize the word IF) there is a better economic or governing system around the evolutionary corner, then no amount of belly-aching and conspiracy theory spin is going to keep it at bay. PROGRESS HAPPENS. Reality check.........sm
So you don't need to research the NAU? I hope the sand will protect your little brain when all heck breaks loose.
The concept of the NAU has been actively pursued by our government (Bush) and the government of Canada and Mexico since 2005. Check it out.
The blueprint President Bush is following was laid out in a 2005 report entitled "Building a North American Community" published by the left-of-center Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The CFR report connects the dots between the Bush administration's actual policy on illegal immigration and the drive to create the North American Union:
At their meeting in Waco, Texas, at the end of March 2005, U.S. President George W. Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin committed their governments to a path of cooperation and joint action. We welcome this important development and offer this report to add urgency and specific recommendations to strengthen their efforts.
What is the plan? Simple, erase the borders. The plan is contained in a "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" little noticed when President Bush and President Fox created it in March 2005:
In March 2005, the leaders of Canada, Mexico, and the United States adopted a Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), establishing ministerial-level working groups to address key security and economic issues facing North America and setting a short deadline for reporting progress back to their governments. President Bush described the significance of the SPP as putting forward a common commitment "to markets and democracy, freedom and trade, and mutual prosperity and security." The policy framework articulated by the three leaders is a significant commitment that will benefit from broad discussion and advice. The Task Force is pleased to provide specific advice on how the partnership can be pursued and realized.
To that end, the Task Force proposes the creation by 2010 of a North American community to enhance security, prosperity, and opportunity. We propose a community based on the principle affirmed in the March 2005 Joint Statement of the three leaders that "our security and prosperity are mutually dependent and complementary." Its boundaries will be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter within which the movement of people, products, and capital will be legal, orderly and safe. Its goal will be to guarantee a free, secure, just, and prosperous North America.
I cannot believe there are people living today who actually believe that there are not hidden agendas in our government and that "we the people" actually know what is going on.
Thank you for the dose of reality.
It seems people like to think in exponentials lately. 'Bush was the worst president in the history of time.' Obama will face 'the most daunting challenge in the history of the country.'
Goodness sakes. Are these posters just so bubble-wrapped in their protective cocoons that they don't know anything about US History?
Our country was forged with blood and steal. This ain't a country for whimps. But I guess we'll find out now what happens when we elect a man who feels it is necessary to apologize for America instead of defend it.
Yup. The one's that's based in reality.
As in the real deal.
Reality check...(sm)
While I do think that Blago needs to go down, I think it should be recognized that this happens in politics ALL THE TIME. That pay to play mentality among politicians is nothing new. I don't think Blago did anything worse than most do. His big mistake was getting caught.
Reality check............ sm
Did you even read the article? It says in part...
"The Obama administration moved on Friday to undo a last-minute Bush administration rule granting broad protections to health workers who refuse to take part in abortions or provide other health care that goes against their consciences."
It goes on to say: "The rule prohibits recipients of federal money from discriminating against doctors, nurses and other health care workers who refuse to perform or assist in abortions or sterilization procedures because of their “religious beliefs or moral convictions.” "
This sounds to me like providers who refuse to do abortions or provide other health care that goes against their religious/moral/personal convictions will lose protection from "discrimination" (read prosecution) by "recipients of federal money" (read welfare recipients). In other words, if this protection is lifted and a woman goes to a physician who refuses to perfrom an abortion because of moral beliefs, then that woman would be free to sue the doctor for withholding medical care....and who would be more prone to sue a physician than one who is on welfare and always looking for free money?
It has nothing to do with asking a health care professional to perform a procedure or deliver health care outside of his/her realm of education or specialization.
Maybe you should consider jumping into reality
You don't give someone like the Queen of England an IPOD for pete's sake. I'll bet his kids pick it out themselves??? This is the Queen of England. He should have consulted with his staff or someone who is more knowledgeable as to what to give a foreign diplomat, especially someone like the Queen of England. And evidently she already has one. You would have thought he would have checked with someone in his office that is knowledgeable about what a proper gift to give would be. Ya think????? But that goes to show there is no one in his cabinet qualified on such issues. The gift should be a symbol of the US. Sorry but I and evidently many others don't think of IPODs when they think of the US. How juvenile to assume everyone would want an IPOD. Somehow I don't see the Queen bee-boppin to tunes stored on an IPOD. But what's worse...he downloaded all of his speeches. Can we say ewwww! Maybe he should have downloaded some episodes of South Park for her too.
If he could have shown how little he cared about a gift to her he just did. American is filled with many wonderful and talented artists. A very nice piece of art would have been much more appropriate than a friggin IPOD.
I keep seeing posts telling us to "drop ridiculous charges", etc about Obama's b/c. You may not realize this yet, but we are just MTs here voicing our opinion that we do not believe the b/c issue has been resolved (because it hasn't) and that we are glad there are others (judges, lawyers, politicians, etc) who are suing and taking this to the supreme court. However to tell us to "drop the charges" is just too silly. We're not the ones who are going to courts, only voicing our opinions. And last I knew that is what this site is for.
I see many posts with interesting articles written by jounalists and people who have been involved in the case since it all began (and even people outside the country), and those posts are met with such replies all screaming how any article that is posted is not a "credible source". I saw someone give news headlines and was told "show us a credible source". Yet time and time again those same people will come back and cite pro-Obama sites like Factcheck.org, PolitiFact, Huffington Post, etc as credible sources (I even saw someone state Obama's own website as a credible source - had to laugh at that one).
People from all over the country (and the world) are writing articles about this. That means there is something to it. People who are journalists, lawyers, etc, are not going to write articles based on nothing. If it was all based on nothing we'd be seeing more lawsuits filed against the people writing the articles.
On this board I see that the people who want the issue resolved and are looking forward to hearing what the supreme courts have to say, and the outcome of all the other numerous lawsuits are doing just that and voicing their opinions. No need to treat them with disrespect. You can post your own post on why you believe what you do. We are all entitled to our opinions, and I enjoy reading the articles.
So let me just say once more....people on this board - we are just MT'sn not the actual people going to the courts suing Obama, hence we have no "charges to drop". We leave that to more capable hands. We are voicing our opinions here and will continue to do so until the issue has been resolved. Don't tell us it has been resolved otherwise there would be no court cases out there.
Lets all wait and see. And as my grandma used to say to me when I was little "Stop being so silly, you silly goose you".
Well...here is a harsh dose of reality....
yes, he said that...however...he was also endorsed by terrorists (Hamas) and Iran...that in and of itself should be concerning. Why do you think they said that? Perhaps because he also said that if the winds turn ugly, he would stand with the Muslims, and they took him literally? Or perhaps he meant it literally? Who knows what he really means? He lived his way one life up until he ran for President, and then turned away from all that as each issue was brought up, because he knew it would hurt his candidacy. So who IS the real Barack Obama? Do YOU know? That is not dark and foreboding. It is being vigilant, it is asking for trust and respect to be earned...adoration is fine, but please be vigilant as well. For YOUR own good.
Pointing to reality is "fearmongering"
February 8, 2009
IT AIN'T FEARMONGERING IF IT'S TRUE.... Just today, the LA Times has a good report on the unprecedented pressure on state budgets right now -- pressure that will not be alleviated by the federal recovery plan because Sens. Collins & Co. believe state aid isn't stimulative enough. While state shortfalls will lead to painful cuts in practically every state, Nevada is poised to get hit much harder than most.
The Times report noted, for example, that Nevada is "facing the most serious shortfall," and lawmakers will have to cut a striking 38% from its state budget. The impact across the state will be both drastic and unavoidable, most notably in the state's public schools, which will soon face a 15% cut.
It wasn't surprising, then, that Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) criticized Senate "centrists" for cutting $40 billion in state aid from the stimulus package, noting that the aid, which appeared in the House version, was intended to stop states from "laying off cops and firefighters, money to help keep teachers going." Republican Sen. John Ensign of Nevada rejected Frank's comments, labeling the remarks "fearmongering." Indeed, Ensign seemed encouraged by the fact that state budgets, including his own, would have to be slashed, calling the budgets "bloated." He said, "What we should be doing is cutting back."
Got that? As the recession worsens, and government spending is needed to prevent more Americans from losing their jobs, a leading Republican senator whose own state is about to get pummeled, believes it's a good idea to "cut back." I can think of a variety of ways to respond to this nonsense, but I think Matt Yglesias summed things up nicely:
The idea that it would be good for states to cut back in the midst of the recession is stupid. The idea that the recession won't, absent federal aid, lead to layoffs of state employees such as teachers and firefighters is also stupid. But the idea that it's simultaneously true that the reason we should eschew aid is that states need to cut back and also true that it's fearmongering to warn of layoffs is doubleplus stupid. What does Ensign think cutbacks consist of? States will be reducing vital services. The cutbacks will have the immediate impact of reducing the incomes of laid-off families and beneficiaries of state programs. That will have an additional impact on businesses where the newly laid-off teachers and cops used to work.
And the reduced level of service will have its own bad economic impacts. Cutting back public safety budgets will mean fewer cops on the beat. That means more crime which will further reduce economic activity. State cutbacks to child care subsidies will make it harder for people who lose jobs to find and accept new ones. The cutbacks to mass transit services that are happening across the country will introduce additional rigidity into the labor market and reduce patronage of businesses that people are accustomed to reaching via transit. And in the most severe cases, cutbacks in assistant to the severely impoverished will have a decades-long impact on the well-being of their children.
Sen. John Ensign is entirely comfortable with all of these developments -- those dreaded state budgets are "bloated," after all -- but doesn't want anyone to acknowledge this publicly. Pointing to reality is "fearmongering." It's not enough for congressional Republicans to stand in the way of sound economic policy during a crisis; they also want to discourage everyone from talking about it
Sadly, this is reality in my state, also......nm
nm
Let's jump over to reality for a minute....(sm)
What Obama is doing is rescinding the Bush bill. He's not putting out a new law that MAKES people do procedures they consider unethical. So basically if you work in the medical field and you didn't do abortions before this bill, chances are that noone is going to MAKE you do them in the future. I think Bush's bill was more targeted towards support services -- for example people who work at a pharmacy who don't believe in the morning after pill. The point I get from all this is that if you don't want to do abortions, don't work in an abortion clinic. The way you guys are describing it, I could make an orthodontist do brain surgery. Let's try reality for a while.
Reality show, you're right.
I think we oldsters can look at it as being 'voted off the island.'
No, dear, I understand fully what reality is.
Reality is truth. I don't expect you to understand anything concerning the truth, though. People who see reality for what it is are simply just sick and tired of being lied to, whether it's by Dumbya or by those of your ilk. Thank God you don't represent the majority of Americans or we'd be in worse trouble than what we're in now.
Trying to communicate with you is impossible, so I choose not to participate in that endeavor any longer.
It wasn't long ago that I was told by my conservative mtstars buddies that poverty in American was not as bad as we thought. To them poverty only meant you didn't have extra spending money and that the impoverished had color TVs, air conditioning, cars, the whole enchilada. They even went through the spiel of posting articles to support them. It has always been my opinion that poverty is alive and well in America and Katrina has unfortunately revealed this to us all too tragically.
Stories of the grinding poverty among the survivors of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans vividly illustrate what many say is a forgotten truth of modern American life — that pockets of desperate poverty still exist in a country of unsurpassed wealth and privilege.
Underscoring that reality, a report by the U.S. Census Bureau (search) released the same week Katrina hit the nation's southeast announced that the national poverty rate rose for the fourth straight year despite continuing growth in production and political rhetoric that the nation's economy is on the upswing.
According to that report, the number of Americans living under the poverty line grew by 1.1 million in 2004 for a total of 37 million people nationwide. That equals 12.7 percent of the total U.S. population. It is the fourth annual increase.
[Poverty] is a problem in America that hasn't gone away — it just went underground for a while, and it shouldn't have, said Sheila Zedlewski, director of the Urban Institute's Income and Benefits Policy Center.
Through images of the predominantly black residents of New Orleans pleading for help, leaving destroyed homes with nothing but the clothes on their backs, America got a wake-up call according to Sheldon Danziger at the National Poverty Center at the University of Michigan.
People are putting these things together, and it will be interesting to see if the attention of the public stays on this, he said. As a country we'd like to think we moved beyond it, but in reality, [poverty] is still a substantial problem.
Others caution against putting too much weight into the new numbers, pointing out that they do not reflect the public assistance low-income individuals and families receive, like Medicaid (search) and welfare, and do not distinguished between truly impoverished individuals and those who are temporarily poor.
The poverty rate began to climb in 2000, the year it hit a 26-year low of 11.3 percent of Americans living under the poverty level, according to U.S Census Bureau figures. That was the lowest point since 1974, when the number was 11.2 percent. The highest point of poverty in recent times was in 1993 at 15.1 percent. Before that, was in 1983, at 15.2 percent.
In 2004, according to the latest study, the poverty rate among African Americans remained the same — at 24.7 percent. Hispanics also saw no change in their poverty rate at 21.9, while whites saw an increase, from 8.2 percent to 8.6 percent. Asian Americans experienced the only decrease, from 11.8 percent to 9.8 percent.
The poverty rate among American families remained at 10.2 percent of the population in 2004. The Office of Budget and Management (search) defines a family of two adults and two children with a median household income of $19,157 or less as living in poverty; or a family of two with no children, making $12,649 a year.
Median household income went unchanged in 2004, according to the census bureau, at $44,389. Blacks continue to have the lowest median income among all ethnic and racial groups, making $30,134 annually.
Wages earned among Americans, however, declined in 2004. For men over 15 working full-time, year round, the real median earnings declined 2.3 percent from 2003, to $40,798. For women with similar work experiences, wages declined by 1 percent to $31,223.
And while unemployment has gone down from 5.5 percent in August 2004 to 4.9 percent in August this year, unemployment among blacks is still the highest in the country, at 9.6 percent in August compared to 4.2 percent for whites and 5.8 for Hispanics.
In New Orleans, where blacks make up 67 percent of the population, 27 percent of the residents are living below poverty level according to a recent study by Total Community Action, Inc. (search), a public advocacy group based in New Orleans.
But some warn that the new census bureau figures may not be an ideal measure, given that they do not take into account the impact of public assistance on a household, or recent tax cuts and child tax credits. Others say the poverty rate had been in steady decline since the early 1990's and see the recent increases as the tail end of the 2000 recession.
It's a bit unfortunate to link the hurricane with the issue of poverty in this country, as though there has been no reduction in poverty since the 1980's, said Rey Hederman, senior policy analyst for the Heritage Foundation.
Since a high point in 1983 the poverty rate for the U.S has been on a decline, aside from the four years following the brief recession in 1989 and the most recent hike, according to the Census Bureau.
Like other economic analysts, Hederman believes the growth in productivity in the U.S economy will eventually produce more jobs and higher incomes for workers.
But so far, Hederman admits, that hasn't happened.
We've got strong productive growth but wages have been relatively stagnant. It's a bit of a paradox as to why it hasn't happened sooner, said Phillip Swagel of the American Enterprise Institute, who blames, in part, the Internet bust six years ago.
Nonetheless, he calls today's economy the most golden era for productivity growth in more than 50 years.
In the short term, it means that firms have been able to produce more without hiring more people, Swagel continued. But in the long term, it will mean that wages and income will go up. It takes time for that relationship to take hold.
But on Wednesday, the Congressional Budget Office (search) announced that hurricane's damage to the southeast could reduce national economic growth by nearly a percent at time when forecasters were hoping for a three to four percent increase by the end of the year. It also expects a loss of 400,000 jobs in the labor market.
Some say that inner cities that have never fully recovered from past economic recessions will no doubt be the hardest hit.
I think for the last 25 years, we have had an economy where most of the gains have been concentrated in a small percentage of the workforce, said Danziger. [The] rising tide has not lifted all boats, the economy has shifted so that a smaller portion of the population gets the increases, and the rest is simply happy to have jobs that experience no wage increase or income increases.
According to the recent Total Community Action study, poverty rates have remained stagnant in New Orleans in the last 40 years and even without the near total destruction of the city, have been the highest in the nation.
It would be ironic that it would take a disaster like this to focus [national attention] on this,
Rep. Mel Watt, R-N.C., and member of the Congressional Black Caucus (search), told FOXNews.com, Every area of our lives these disparities exist and we have tried to focus on them all year.
Minority populations left behind in many cities often suffer from bad schools and are at a real disadvantage compared to their suburban middle class and affluent counterparts, say experts.
The poverty differences by education, by race, by central city versus the suburbs, are long standing, said Danziger, who also said that by leaving New Orleans' most disadvantaged, immobile residents behind the hurricane clearly brought that into stark contrast.
The Urban Institute’s Zedlewski admits that over the last several years more resources have been focused on the symptoms of poverty — poor education and healthcare.
If you look at the long haul it is true progress has been made, she said, adding that more needs to be done, particularly in the African American community, regarding single motherhood, the high rate of incarcerated males and investing in adult education.
Swagel, who recently left his job as chief of staff for the White House Council of Economic Advisors (search), believes the current administration has put into place policies — notably tax cuts — that have stimulated growth and are benefiting middle and lower income families the most.
I would say our policies are on the right track, he said. They are working in the right direction, and we should not reverse course when things are improving.
Watt doesn't buy the tax cut stimulus scenario. As soon as this President came in and passing these massive tax cuts, [the poverty rate] turned and went in the opposite direction, he said. This administration is about supporting people of higher income and it makes no bones about it.
Meanwhile, thousands of displaced people from New Orleans are looking for jobs, and trying to begin new lives in places like Houston and Baton Rouge. Poverty advocates hope that in the long term, available education and job training opportunities, as well as the higher wages that have been promised by economists, aren't out of reach.
Stories of the grinding poverty among the survivors of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans vividly illustrate what many say is a forgotten truth of modern American life — that pockets of desperate poverty still exist in a country of unsurpassed wealth and privilege.
Underscoring that reality, a report by the U.S. Census Bureau (search) released the same week Katrina hit the nation's southeast announced that the national poverty rate rose for the fourth straight year despite continuing growth in production and political rhetoric that the nation's economy is on the upswing.
According to that report, the number of Americans living under the poverty line grew by 1.1 million in 2004 for a total of 37 million people nationwide. That equals 12.7 percent of the total U.S. population. It is the fourth annual increase.
[Poverty] is a problem in America that hasn't gone away — it just went underground for a while, and it shouldn't have, said Sheila Zedlewski, director of the Urban Institute's Income and Benefits Policy Center.
Through images of the predominantly black residents of New Orleans pleading for help, leaving destroyed homes with nothing but the clothes on their backs, America got a wake-up call according to Sheldon Danziger at the National Poverty Center at the University of Michigan.
reality bites very hard...be aware....
.
Reality of Homelessness! Important Read!
I don't know what world you live in, but I see people with torn filthy clothes and holes in their shoes, who haven't bathed in months, lined up on the lawn of City Hall hoping to get a decent meal. They line up in the park on certain days to get sandwiches and a soft drink. Most of these people have mental illnesses and are unable to care for themselves. They were tossed out onto the streets when the government cut social programs and got rid of the mental institutions that were caring for them. They sleep behind bushes, sleep in sewer holes, and sneak into garages to get out of the rain. We have actually found dead bodies of homeless people in the garage of our apartment building! It is absolutely heartbreaking! By the way, this is in a neighborhood where 2-bedroom condos can sell for as much as $4,000,000 each! You can pay $4,000,000 for a condo, but there will be mentally ill homeless people sleeping in your bushes at night. They wander the streets aimlessly day and night. They stand on corners and yell unintelligible gibberish at people and cars as they go by. They are confused, frightened, angry, constantly in danger, and obviously mentally ill. I see it every single day, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Now, you tell me that our government is giving too much to the poor! At least 1/3 of these homeless people are women, which makes breaks my heart even more. I have personally tried to give them clothing, money, toiletries, and help in any way possible, but sometimes they don't even understand that I am trying to help them. Tell me again that our Country is doing all it can for the poor lost souls that need community programs to help them survive! I am so sick of all you whining suburban I-gave-a-donation-at-church people who have no idea what it truly means to be homeless. Flame me if you want...I speak the truth!
Reality of Homelessness - Important Read
I don't know what world you live in, but I see people with torn filthy clothes and holes in their shoes, who haven't bathed in months, lined up on the lawn of City Hall hoping to get a decent meal. They line up in the park on certain days to get sandwiches and a soft drink. Most of these people have mental illnesses and are unable to care for themselves. They were tossed out onto the streets when the government cut social programs and got rid of the mental institutions that were caring for them. They sleep behind bushes, sleep in sewer holes, and sneak into garages to get out of the rain. We have actually found dead bodies of homeless people in the garage of our apartment building! It is absolutely heartbreaking! By the way, this is in a neighborhood where 2-bedroom condos can sell for as much as $4,000,000 each! You can pay $4,000,000 for a condo, but there will be mentally ill homeless people sleeping in your bushes at night. They wander the streets aimlessly day and night. They stand on corners and yell unintelligible gibberish at people and cars as they go by. They are confused, frightened, angry, constantly in danger, and obviously mentally ill. I see it every single day, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Now, you tell me that our government is giving too much to the poor! At least 1/3 of these homeless people are women, which makes breaks my heart even more. I have personally tried to give them clothing, money, toiletries, and help in any way possible, but sometimes they don't even understand that I am trying to help them. Tell me again that our Country is doing all it can for the poor lost souls that need community programs to help them survive! I am so sick of all you whining suburban I-gave-a-donation-at-church people who have no idea what it truly means to be homeless. Flame me if you want...I speak the truth!
I have to face reality at some point and realize
While I hope its McCain, Obama “seems” to be in the lead.I say seems because I think a lot of what we hear gets distorted and I have to remember back to when Gore ran and everyone was 100% sure he’d win he didn’t.Also I think everyone was sure that Kerry would win and he didn’t.And I was also talking to my dad and he said when Kennedy & Nixon were running everyone was sure Nixon would win, but he didn’t.So I believe that there is nothing that we can be sure of and you just never know what could happen.And whether it is Obama or McCain, I hope the country will turn around and improve.
I’d like to share a couple thoughts as I’m curious if other people feel this way too.
First, I have to say that I’m sitting here with my ballot not filled out yet and not sure if I will even vote because the two choices are neither of whom I picked.I know I can write in anyone I want, but will that just waste my vote on nothing?While I’m a registered democrat there is just some things that are not sitting right and its on both sides.On the dem side I would have liked to have seen Richardson or Kucinich, and on the rep side I would have liked to see Ron Paul or Duncan Hunter.But no, who do they pick?John McCain.The guy who lost against Bush (talk about a bad omen).I just don’t get why they think he will win over Barack Obama if he couldn't even win over Bush.No doubt about it Barack Obama is a spectacular speaker.He seems well put together.So how in the world did they ever think McCain could win over him.I also don’t get it because Romney, Huckabee & Paul were doing very well in the primaries and McCain was not, but at the last minute all of a sudden McCain is picked.Maybe the “big plan” is they put in such a person on purpose so the democrats would win.One can only imagine.So with that said I’m not real trustful of the government and here I sit with my blank ballot wondering what to do.
While I am not for either of the candidates that are running for President I do happen to like both running mates.I actually hoped Biden would have been chosen for President, and even though I had no idea who Sarah Palin was, I do like her.Yes you can ridicule me all you like, but I could care less about the “fluff” stuff, I’ve read about what she has accomplished and I think she’s a fine person.My perfect ticket.Biden/Palin.HA HA HA.Please don’t flame me, I’m just trying to describe my dislike for the Presidential candidates.
While I do have to admit McCain just doesn’t seem to “get it”.There is so much he could bring up but he doesn’t and it makes me wonder how strong of a person he is and would he be good in the office.My husband adamantly flat out says “NO”.Then in the same breath he says but look at the other candidate.Both of them scare me.Not for anything the media says because I don’t believe or trust the media, but rather looking at their past records.I believe they are both saying what they believe we want to hear to get elected - isn’t that what all politicians do?
As for Obama’s tax hike, I don’t have to worry because I don’t make $250K or over, but at the same time I don’t want to receive from the people who do because that would not be fair to them.Especially someone putting in over 60 hours a week to make ends meet and now they are going to take some of that and give to me?What I do have to worry about is if he pulls a Bill Clinton and then lowers the tax rate and now people making 90K and up will have more taken from them.Then when he realizes he needs more money to fund all his programs he will then lower the rate and lower and lower.Then before we know it instead of getting taxed 23% on 30K a year we will be taxed 42 or 43% like we were under the last democrat president.So, we’ll just have to wait and see, and if it happens I will deal with it.
As for who’s to blame for what has happened with the economy there is enough blame to go around on both sides.You can’t honestly say it’s all the republicans fault or it’s all the democrats fault.That’s not fair because I’ve seen both sides against the bail out and both sides for it.It’s just a little disheartening to know that both candidates who want to be our leader voted for it (no matter what they said ahead of time).This is why I have a lot of distrust in them both.
Also what I don’t like is if I don’t vote for Obama because of his policies people will accuse me of being a bigot and will say I’m not voting for him just because he’s black (which is not true), but on the other hand there are people out their voting for him solely because he is black.Are they bigots too? (which as I stated earlier I have not voted for anyone yet).
What I am trying to do right now is research some of what Nostradamus predicted.It seems like I remember he had said something about what would happen to America.He predicted a lot from World Wars ad Hitler coming to rise, to the Twin Towers falling.Yes, I know some of his predictions did not come true, but he had more right than wrong.So I’m curious and researching some of his predictions to see if there is anything about the US and what will happen to our country.My husband says he believes there is.If I find something I can post if anyone is interested.
What I am wondering and starting to believe more and more is maybe this is our time and its up.If you believe in Armageddon or Nostradamus or another other future events maybe it’s already set in stone that our time has come.Maybe we have lived a little too much of “the good life” and now its time for a transformation in America and that is why Obama will get in.Some of us believe we may not “deserve” it and a lot of people probably think its nonsense, but we have to remember we thought we would never be attacked before 9/11 either.So, I’m not saying I think we deserve it, but just a thought that maybe our time has come.So wonder if others think this way too, or am I just hitting heavy on the “Ju-Ju Juice”.HA HA
Would like to hear your thoughts.Please no slams.I tried not to slam any of the candidates so nobody would get offended.There’s plenty I don’t like about all of them, and some I do like about all of them.I just feel really mixed up right now and wonder if others are like me (or am I just weird).
Can you not grasp the difference between talks of assassination and candidates getting up talking in their rallies bringing up issues about their oponents (both sides). M/P got up and spoke about Obama's shady background, his friendships with the people like Ayers (a known terrorist), ACORN, Rev. Wright, etc, etc, etc. This list goes on and on and on. They spoke about Obama's viewpoints on abortion and his voting record. And Obama/Biden did the same thing. Whatever the supporters think up in their own minds is nobody's fault and you will have a few nuts who will say terrible things. But face reality - it is on both sides. There is so much hatred being spewed against Palin and her family for no good reason. You take one part of her interview and claim she can't make sentences but you ignore the fact that when Obama speaks it is usually with um, er, uh, um, um, er, um, etc. Then he can't even speak without pre-written speeches and teleprompters.
What I'm trying to say is there are violent people on both sides. You're coming off as though everyone who is supporting Obama/Biden are peaceful people that all just want to get along and have a big group hug. OH PLEASE!!! What that video showed you is that there are violent people who were trying to attack and overturn Palin's motorcade. And if they were successful they would have dragged her out and beaten her to death. Remember Reginald Denny? There are violent people are on both sides.
Also, the so called "thousands and thousands at a Palin rally" is a bunch of hooey. Never heard on tape and secret service reported they never once heard anyone yell anything against Obama that the Obama supporters are claiming they did. You can't make up something that didn't happen. Well actually you are making up something that didn't happen but it doesn't make it true.
As for Obama supporters "responding in kind". Oh please....the Obama suporters spewed nothing but hatred and lies against the M/P camp, AND we saw that in Obama's attack ads. As for negative campaigning. Both did negative campaigning. The first we saw of it was Obama. Look at what he did to Hillary.
As for the entire media/press...they were too busy having a love fest with Obama they got away from reporting news and kept spewing out their opinions. Lets talk about the liberal TV and radio stations (I watch them all). The liberal stations never reported one negative thing about Obama or Biden. Not one thing!!!!! Yet they kept badgering and spewing their lies and hatred against M/P - hence Chris Matthews and Keith Olberman were held back from reporting the main political stories - MSNBC & CNN lost a lot of viewers because of their vicious lies and not reporting facts anymmore.
As for saying Palin made a fool of herself. Well looks like you didn't even listen to anything she ever said. You probably only listened to what MSNBC or CNN reported about her. She has more experience as Governor than Obama has as a junior senator. And did more good things for her state and has around a 90% approval rating. And while she was doing this where was Obama? Sitting in a hate-filled sermons of Rev. Wright twice a month, having the terrorist Ayers jump start his political career. And hanging out with people like Rezco, Daley, and others. Truth is Palin was never given a fair chance by the media. Watching her interviewed by the people who wanted to see her fail was the worst journalism I have ever seen and those two (Couric and Gibson) should be fired. They have shown they have no journalistic qualities. Talk about getting a free ride - that's where they elevated Obama and Biden. Whenever Biden made a gaff (and BIG ones) they let him slide. They never gave Obama the tough questions. And they never reported on him saying there are 57 states. All that was conveniently pushed under the rug to try to be forgotten. So yes I found it very irresponsible that they treated Obama like he was king while they trashed Palin/McCain.
Like one poster said...if M/P won you would hear about assissination attempts coming from the Obama people. And still when I pull up article after article after article I am not seeing Palin supporting an assassination as you are trying to claim. I am however seeing Hillary's name come up time after time.
If you want to talk about behaving like a 5th grader look no further than the mirror. I am addressing issues and have been. I read all articles, listen to all TV/radio stations whether I agree or not. You're just repeating what I've already heard on the liberal stations and we all know they cannot be trusted to tell the truth. Maybe a bit of research would be a good thing. I've done it, but then again you have to have an open mind when reading articles.
Don't you get that ignoring facts shows how little you research, how biased one is hence none of your arguments are valid.
Creating conspiracy theories is not how America is going to be able to move forward...don't you get that?
You really do have a hard time facing reality
I posted an article that someone (with more knowledge than you have regarding the history of past and present presidents) wrote. I did not write that myself, so don't tell me "nice try". Your post is a "nice try" but your clouded vision of the truth is so far from the truth which makes it void.
The fact which most dems hate to face is that while Bush may be one of the worst presidents in our history he is not "the" worst.
As for the election between Bush/Gore, I understand as a Gore lover you hate to face (and evidently have not faced it yet) the facts.
Bush beat Gore by 543 votes in FL (BTW - I didn't vote for Bush so I didn't help him there). The reason for that...you have Nader to blame not Bush. So with Bush ahead by 543 votes you just expected him to step down? I think Obama said it very well when he was running against Hillary and he was ahead and Hillary was saying that he should accept a position as VP. He said "Why would the person who is ahead in votes talk about becoming VP to the person who is in 2nd place". This is a presidential race. Sorry but Gore did not receive more votes than Bush did (if your talking about Florida alone - there was a whole country who voted for Bush). You've really got to come to grips with reality.
Florida vote -
Republican - 2,912,790
Democrat - 2,912,253
Overall election outcome
271 Electoral votes for Bush
266 Electoral votes for Gore
Elections are based upon electoral votes. I also find it funny that each election if democrats are ahead by electorals they all say that its the electoral votes that matter, but when they find they are losing in electoral votes and head in popular vote they push and push and push to have the popular vote be the ones that count.
If AL Gore had conceded the way he should have the country would have not felt this rift he created. So if you have anyone to thank for Al Gore losing, which he did fair and square then I'd go talk to Nader. Even people who advised Bill Clinton and are democrats are coming out saying Nader was the losing factor for Gore.
So for now I will stick with the article posted by someone who has done research, who does not like Bush but has pointed out the fact that is not "the" worst president in history.
All the other Bush haters can think all they want. Their hate towards a person taints any inkling of what they think is the truth. Hence, your reply has no truth to it.
Reality - most of the people voted for him only because of his race
Even had to clear my ears a few times as I couldn't believe what I was hearing. Most of the people who voted for Obama voted for him only because his race. There are few out there who educated themselves and truly believed in his ideas, hopes and dreams. The rest...when they were told McCain's policies and asked if that's why they were voting for Obama they said yes. Others were asked the question, "So if Obama wins President you wouldn't mind having Sarah Palin as the VP" they said "no not at all I think she'd make a fine VP". Most think like they do and I heard many people reveal that they are voting for him simply because he is black and it's time we need a black president.
Reality check: Rome wasn't built in a day.
su
Nothing sexist about reality. Palin's wink is of her own making.
The sexist pandering of a failing candidate who chose an unqualified token running mate, thinking we would vote with our genitals and come-a-running to save his maverick behind was the ultimate insult. The wrong woman with anti-feminist policies made it easy to rally behind Hillary, her party and her candidate. Yes, we have given it some thought.
Reality: Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, Kennedy,
Truman, Nixon x2, Ford x2, Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr, Clinton x2, Wx3....all targets of assassination, 4 successful....not to mention RFK, MLK, Medgar Evers, etc.
Assassinations happen. I have seen 17 of them in my own lifetime. Of the 17, at least 8 of them were directly related to hate speech. What is REALLY frustrating is to witness the same tired cycle play itself out over and over and over again and have people attempt to extract the hate speech out of the equation. Intentional or not, it was there during this campaign out of the mouths of McCain and Palin, their campaign staff and their followers. To deny this is insane and indicates to me that the value of human life for some is very tenuous and equivocal.
And inject a healthy dose of reality of the consequences
of sitting on the sidelines and doing nothing. I think there is a lot of truth in the contention that the consumer credit freeze-out by TARP funded banks doing God-knows-what with the money.
People drinking the Koolaid love O. Reality
nm
Losing your parental rights is a reality in the near future.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=87929
Reality check for Fixed Noise viewers....(sm)
From Rupert Murdoch speaking about Fox dealing with economic downturn:
While it's impossible to be completely prepared for a downturn of this magnitude, we began priming ourselves for a weakening economy earlier last year. We implemented strict cost cutting measures across all our operations. We reduced head count in individual businesses where appropriate and we scaled back on capital expenditures.
Even on [finance] terms, we have never been a company that tolerates facts.
marks the location of current message within thread
