Monday, July 25, 2011

Short term memory - I think not.


Worth Remembering: Republicans Usually Support Debt Ceiling Increases


They must really be thinking the American public has a very poor memory to pull this racket off.
Updated: Since 2009, after Barack Obama was inaugurated as President, Republican Senators have stood steadfastly against raising the debt ceiling: in 2009, two supported H.R. 1 and one supported H.R. 4314. None supported the 2010 vote on H.J. Res. 45.But has this always been the case?
In January 2010, Donny Shaw calculated the vote tally since 1997 on bills that included provisions to raise the debt ceiling. It may surprise you. Or not, if you’re cynical.
Republican Senators : Votes On Raising Debt Ceiling
Votes On Raising Debt Ceiling : Republican Senators, 1997-2010
Although the trend away from almost unanimous support began in the Bush Administration, there was no serious defection of the GOP faithful until 2009.
Of course, the Democrats have been known to play partisan football with the debt ceiling also.

senate debt vote
Democrat and Republican Senators Voting "Yes" On Bills Raising Debt Ceiling
Since March 1962, Congress has enacted 74 separate measures that have altered the limit on federal debt. Most of these changes in the debt limit were, measured in percentage terms, small in comparison to changes adopted in wartime or during the Great Depression. Some recent increases in the debt limit, however, were large in dollar terms. For instance, in May 2003, the debt limit increased by $984 billion.
[...]
The Senate leadership expressed strong reluctance to include a debt limit increase in the supplemental appropriation bill. Instead, on June 11 [2002], the Senate adopted a bill (S. 2578), without debate, to raise the debt limit by $450 billion to $6,400 billion. At that time, a $450 billion debt limit increase was thought to provide enough borrowing authority for government operations through the rest of calendar year 2002, if not through the summer of 2003. With the possibility of default looming over it, the House passed the $450 billion debt limit increase by a single vote on June 27. The Presidentsigned the bill into law on June 28 (P.L. 107-199, 116 Stat. 734), ending the 2002 debt limit crisis.27
[...]
The Senate received the debt-limit legislation on April 11 [2003], but did not act until May 23, after receiving further Treasury warnings of imminent default. On that day, debt subject to limit was $25 million (or 0.0004%) below the existing $6,400 billion limit. The Senate adopted the legislation, after rejecting eight amendments and sent it to the President, who signed it on May 27. This legislation raised the debt limit to $7,384 billion (P.L. 108-24, 117 Stat. 710).
[...]
After the elections, Senator Frist, on November 16, 2004, introduced legislation (S. 2986) to raise the debt limit by $800 billion, from $7,384 billion to $8,184 billion. The Senate approved the increase on November 17, 2004. The House considered and approved the increase on November 18. The President signed the legislation into law (P.L. 108-415, 118 Stat. 2337) on November 19, 2004. Estimates made at that time anticipated the new limit would be reached between August and December 2005.
Table 2. Increases in the Debt Limit Since January 2000 Date and Change From Previous Limit ($ billion)
June 28, 2002 $450
May 27, 2003 $984
Nov. 19, 2004 $800
Mar. 20, 2006 $781
Sept. 29, 2007 $850
July 30, 2008 $800
Oct. 3, 2008 $700
Feb. 17, 2009 $789
Dec. 28, 2009 $29
Between August 1997, when the debt limit was raised to $5,950 billion, and the beginning of FY2002 in October 2001, federal budget surpluses reduced debt held by the public. From the end of FY2001, the last fiscal year with a surplus, until the end of FY2008, debt held by the public subject to limit grew by $2,484 billion.
Here’s a spreadsheet showing every bill and debt ceiling increase since FDR. Does not






Republican emailing with pictures of all the presidents. Obama's square is just a black space with two eyeballs.

It's perfectly OK to be a racist in the Republican Party, as long as you keep it 'in house' and pass it off as a joke.

By Ted McLaughlin

Before the mid-sixties,the dominant political party in the South (and in Texas) was the Democratic Party. In fact, at that time, most of those states had virtually a one-party system. I know that in Texas, the only real election was in the Democratic primary, because the November election was a foregone conclusion. Republicans didn't have a chance.


But that changed in the mid-sixties, when President Lyndon Johnson and the Democrats stepped up, bit the bullet, and did the right thing by passing the civil rights laws. It was badly needed and long overdue, but it was also disastrous for the Democratic Party in the South. Sadly, there were still a lot of racists in Texas and the South at that time, and they fled en masse to the Republican Party.

With the addition of this huge volume of racists, the Republican Party in the South not only became competitive, but became the dominant party of the region. It is still that way, although due to changing attitudes the Democrats are now starting to become more competitive in Texas and many Southern states, as more and more whites shed their racism.

But while white racists fled the Democratic Party in the late Sixties, African-Americans flocked to that party. Even to this date, it is not uncommon for African-Americans to vote for Democrats in a block -- many times voting 90-95% Democratic in elections.

Republicans have pushed forward their tokens like Alan Keyes and Michael Steele, trying to give the impression they are a "big tent" party. Then they are amazed that these tokens aren't able to attract African-Americans to their party. They haven't figured out that the tokenism won't work as long as their party harbors and accepts a rabidly racist element.

They not only harbor these racists, but in many instances they allow them to assume positions of power and influence in the party. A couple of fresh instances of this came to light just in the last week.

In South Carolina, a prominent GOP activist named Rusty DePassresponded to a Facebook comment about a gorilla escaping a Columbia zoo by remarking, "I'm sure it's just one of Michelle's ancestors -- probably harmless."

When called to task on this incrediby racist remark, his only defense was "The comment was clearly in jest." He thinks it's OK to be racist, as long as its funny. Well, it's not OK, and it shows just how accepting of racists and racism the Republican Party has become.

Meanwhile in Tennessee, Sherri Goforth, a legislative staffer for Republican State Senator Diane Black, e-mailed a little racist humorto some others in her party. It was a poster that had been knocking around the internet for a while among right wing racists. It shows pictures of all the presidents of the United States -- all but President Obama. Obama's square is just a black space with two eyeballs.

Was Ms. Goforth embarrassed by her obviously racist action? Not in the least. She was just upset because she accidently sent the e-mail to some who weren't racists and she got exposed. She said, “I went on the wrong email and I inadvertently hit the wrong button. I’m very sick about it, and it’s one of those things I can’t change or take back.”

It's perfectly OK to be a racist in the Republican Party, as long as you keep it "in house" and pass it off as a joke. These are not the only instances of Republican racism. There have been many others, like the poster showing the White House lawn turned into a watermelon patch. Is it any wonder that most African-Americans (and other minorities) don't feel comfortable in the Republican Party -- the party that accepts such behavior from its members?

With each succeeding generation, the United States becomes a little less racist. Added to the fact that many whites are shedding their racist tendencies, is the fact that in many parts of this country, the majority of the population is now composed of minorities. Both of these trends are going to continue, and that's bad news for the Republican Party.

The Republican Party must face its internal racism and get rid of it. Failure to do so will ensure they become a party of little significance in the future, and could result in their demise. Dump the racism or go the way of the Whigs!





The reason Why the republicans failed to locate Bin Ladin?  and what was the reason Obama had to do it for Bush?






(Reuters) - President Barack Obama said Friday that capturing or killing al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden remains a high priority as the United States marks the anniversary of the September 11 attacks in 2001.
"Capturing or killing bin Laden and Zawahri would be extremely important to our national security," Obama said, referring to al Qaeda's second-in-command Ayman al-Zawahri.
"It doesn't solve all our problems but it remains a high priority to this administration," Obama said in response to a question at a news conference covering a range of domestic and international topics.
As the United States has "ramped up the pressure" on al Qaeda, "what's happened is bin Laden has gone deep underground," Obama said.
The consequence, he said, is bin Laden and others "may have been holed up in ways that have made it harder for them to operate."
Obama warned "there is always going to be the potential" for individuals or small groups to carry out strikes against U.S. targets.
Ultimately, the United States will "stamp out" threats from militants, he said, "but it's going to take some time."
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)