Mercury Rising 鳯女

Politics, life, and other things that matter

Archive for the ‘Pete Peterson’ Category

Thursday News Roundup

Posted by Phoenix Woman on July 29, 2010

— Why pepper spray is better than guns for dealing with bears:

Moving slowly, naturally, trying not to alarm the bears, the group backed up until they could scramble above the trail to a rocky platform.

The mother bear passed below, one cub in tow, “but the second one stopped. Then all of a sudden he started coming at us, and I thought, ‘Ooohh, no.’ ”

The hikers shouted, clapped their hands, but the yearling kept on.

At 40 yards, [zookeeper Jack] Hanna unleashed a haze of pepper spray – “but there was wind, and it didn’t do a thing.”

At 20 yards, he let loose a brief burst again, and the bear just shook his head and kept on coming.

At 10 yards, “I unloaded it right into his face,” Hanna said. The bear stopped like he’d hit a wall, pawed at his face, turned and ran.


“Personally,” he said, “I’m not for this new rule that allows people to carry guns in Glacier. Somebody’s going to get hurt. If I’d shot that cub, and it’d started squealing, I’d have had a heck of a time with that mama bear.”

“If I’d had a gun, there’d have been a trainwreck,” he said. “The mother would’ve taken me right out.”

Guns are lethal, he said, but too often they only wound. Guns also are hard to aim in a crisis, but pepper spray shoots out a wide mist.

“It’s hard to miss,” he said.

Saul Friedman explodes a few of Pete Peterson’s favorite lies concerning Social Security, and closes with this passage:

Economist Dean Baker, director of the CEPR noted that so far the commission seems to be considering only benefit cuts: “There is a great deal of talk in policy circles about cutting Social Security, but very little discussion of the financial situation of those affected by the cuts.”

A poll by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center, commissioned by the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, found that only two percent of Americans believe Social Security is a major cause of the deficit and 78 percent oppose raising the retirement age.

There are easier fixes that won’t cut benefits: Obama proposed the simplest solution when he was running for president and before he became enamored with turning the cheek of compromise. At the moment, as I mentioned, the Social Security payroll tax is imposed on the first $106,800 of earnings, which means the most affluent executives pay no more than their secretaries. Obama proposed raising the cap to $250,000 while lowering the taxes for many workers.

The National Committee poll found that 50 percent of Americans, including some high wage-earners, favored solving Social Security’s future problem by removing the cap. The Washington Post‘s Ezra Klein said the Congressional Budget Office estimates removing the cap would raise $100 billion a year in revenues. And it would solve Social Security’s future shortfall. Even the most affluent figures, including Warren Buffett and Bill Gates, have suggested removing the cap. Social Security could also raise money by being allowed to invest in higher-yielding Treasury bonds rather than the lower yielding special bonds.

You can do some research on how to solve Social Security’s 30 year financial problem by playing the Social Security game at the site of the American Academy of Actuaries. It shows how removing the cap would more than solve the program. But we Social Security advocates need you to understand that if the present version of the Republican Party regains control of Congress, its leaders and its candidates have promised to kill the nation’s finest contribution to social justice. They will dance on Social Security’s grave rather than celebrate its diamond jubilee.

Check out for more information.

Posted in 'starving the beast', (Rich) Taxpayers League, gun issues, Pete Peterson, Social Security | 1 Comment »

WaPo/ABC Poll: 80% Of Americans Care LOTS MORE About Jobs Than Pete Peterson’s Deficit Scare Stuff

Posted by Phoenix Woman on July 13, 2010

Blue Texan has the skinny.

Posted in 'starving the beast', (Rich) Taxpayers League, 2010, deficit, economy, Pete Peterson | 2 Comments »

Trouble For The Catfood Commisssion?

Posted by Phoenix Woman on July 10, 2010

Has the plan to destroy Social Security and Medicare in the name of making Pete Peterson happy deficit reduction been derailed? Possibly — though I’m not holding my breath or letting my guard down.

Emptywheel reports that if Bob Corker means what he says — a dicey proposition, to be sure — then the Catfood Commission’s plan to destroy what’s left of the New Deal and Great Society is dead as a doornail:

Corker called on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.), the Democratic leaders in their respective chambers, to make a similar pledge.

“I think for Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi to say the same thing — that they’re not going to try to use the lame-duck session as a place to do things that otherwise would not pass,” he said. “That type of thinking, that concern about … cap-and-trade and other types of policies just feeds into this whole unpredictability issue, the issue of what’s going to happen in Washington. We need to move away from that uncertainty.”

As Emptywheel points out, that’s exactly when the White House was planning to execute the Catfood Commission’s plan to execute Social Security:

White House officials are working closely with the president’s new fiscal commission in the hope that the bipartisan commissions final report will provide Republican cover for the deal. The commission, due to report by December 1, needs fourteen out of its eighteen members to make an official recommendation. One hope of the deficit hawks is that a super-majority report could steamroll a lame duck session of Congress to act quickly, pending a more Republican Congress in January.

This by itself wouldn’t be particularly good news, but there is also this news that Earl Pomeroy — not exactly a liberal himself — is taking dead aim at the Catfoodies with his own hearing, scheduled for July 15, on how best to protect Social Security.

Posted in (Rich) Taxpayers League, 2010, deficit, greed, Pete Peterson, Social Security | Comments Off on Trouble For The Catfood Commisssion?

Washington Post Lies About What Polls Say So It Can Push Pete Peterson’s Agenda

Posted by Phoenix Woman on June 21, 2010

Bsom has the scoop:

A stunning front-page article in Saturday’s Washington Post moves the paper firmly into conservatives’ dream universe on deficit policy. “Stimulus plans run up against deficit fears” by Lori Montgomery serves up this whopper:

If Congress doesn’t provide additional stimulus spending, economists inside and outside the administration warn that the nation risks a prolonged period of high unemployment or, more frightening, a descent back into recession. But a competing threat — the exploding federal budget deficit — seems to be resonating more powerfully in Congress and among voters.

There you have it: the budget deficit is an issue that’s resonating more with voters than the issues of high unemployment or the possibility of further economic downturn generally. It’s a trendy right-wing meme of the last few months, but here it is in the news pages of the Washington Post.

But is this notion supported by what the polling actually says? No. Not even close.

Bsom then goes on to list several polls that show that the public’s biggest concern is not the deficit. Other issues, such as jobs, rate much higher.

Posted in 'starving the beast', (Rich) Taxpayers League, deficit, distractions, environment, Pete Peterson | 3 Comments »

Pity Washington DC

Posted by Phoenix Woman on June 20, 2010

All of its major newspapers are in the hands of neocons or paleocons, and none of them have your interests at heart.

Case in point: Wall Street billionaire Pete Peterson, the Nixon Cabinet member who has been trying to destroy Social Security for the past two decades in the name of “fixing the deficit”, apparently now shares control of the WaPo’s newsroom with Fred Hiatt and can dump anti-SocSec and anti-Medicare pieces from his Fiscal Times propaganda rag into the Post whenever he wants:

It told readers that: “On the fiscal commission, Stern [Andy Stern, former head of the Service Employees International Union, one of members highlighted in the piece] is already looking for ways to break through the ideological camps on deficit-reduction.” In fact, individuals who are not motivated by ideology would note that the country’s projected long-term deficit problem is driven almost entirely by the broken U.S. health care system.

If per person health care costs were the same in the United States as in any other wealthy country, then the projections would show huge budget surpluses rather than deficits. It also should be possible for the people in the United States to take advantage of lower cost health care systems elsewhere even if the power of special interests like the insurance and pharmaceutical industry prevent reform here. This basic fact should feature prominently in any discussion of the long-term deficit that is not motivated by ideology. It is never mentioned in this piece.

But of course this is all part of the Southern Strategy: The corporate-religious bigot alliance to con white working-class Americans into voting for corporate tax cuts and against their own economic interests as a way to hurt people with darker skins than theirs. Once again, I bring Reagan advisor Lee Atwater back from the grave, all the way from 1981, to explain:

”You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘Ni–er, ni–er, ni–er.’ By 1968 you can’t say ‘ni–er’ — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now [that] you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.

”And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I’m not saying that. But I’m saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, ‘We want to cut this,’ is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than ‘Ni–er, ni–er.”’

This is why his fellow Republicans were and are so angry at Michael Steele, who while he tries to be a good Republican has this unfortunate habit of remembering that he is a black man, and thus is incapable of hewing to the GOP lie that the Southern Strategy was never used after Nixon’s time. It is, in fact, not only still in use today, it is the basis of all Republican and conservative actions worth dignifying with the name.

Posted in 'starving the beast', (Rich) Taxpayers League, deficit, distractions, Pete Peterson, phony scandals, privatization, safety net, Silver Spoon Squad, Social Security, Southern Strategy | 3 Comments »

Deficit Hysteria Debunked Two Ways

Posted by Phoenix Woman on May 30, 2010

The inestimable Scarecrow kicks out the jams on poor deluded Carl Hulse of the NYT:

Hulse manages both to describe and legitimize Congress’ growing hysteria about the size of US deficits/debts. But he doesn’t bother to ask or quote a single economist, let alone the many who have been explaining for months, now screaming, that deficit spending now is not only not a serious problem but absolutely necessary to deal with lingering effects of the Great Recession.

All Hulse had to do was check with the Times Nobel economist or any of the Times’ stable of economic/business writers. Paul Krugman, along with Brad DeLong, Joe Stiglitz, Jaime Galbraith, Dean Baker, or if you prefer, Mark Zandi and many, many other serious economists, have been calling out the fraudulent arguments of the Pete Peterson deficit hawks for months and telling us we need more, not less spending to help the economy.

Every one of these reputable economists refutes the assumed premises of Hulse’ article and the prevailing ignorant mindset of too many in Congress that our debt/deficits are too high for the conditions we’re in. Instead, Hulse just takes for granted the false view, spread by deficit hawks, that deficit spending is irresponsible, an unfair burden on our children and a risk of inflation. No, it’s not.

Furthermore, Jamie Galbraith argues that we need big deficits — now and later:

The public deficit is just the obverse of net private savings. That is, when private credit is booming, investment exceeds saving and deficits tend to disappear. That’s what happened in the 1990s. When credit collapses, deficits return. That’s what’s happening now. Large long-term deficits will occur, or not, depending only on whether we succeed in generating a new growth cycle, financed by the expansion of private credit. Policies to cut spending or raise taxes — now or for that matter in the future — contribute nothing to this goal.

Financial reform and debt relief are therefore the only paths to public deficit reduction.; It would be nice to have them, for the economy works better and people are happier when they can borrow and invest privately. But if we don’t get them, the alternative isn’t a “return to fiscal responsibility.” It’s a choice between large public budget deficits that fund important and useful activities and tax relief, or large deficits because the recession, housing slump and high unemployment drag on and on, all made worse by cuts in Social Security, Medicare and other public spending.

Yes, we must defend Social Security and Medicare from Wall Street and its political agents — which now, sadly, include the Obama White House. But we’ll lose on that — and everything else — if we start by giving up the fight for an aggressive, effective, sustained and long-range economic recovery program, deficits and all.

Posted in 'starving the beast', (Rich) Taxpayers League, deficit, Pete Peterson, Social Security | 5 Comments »

Somebody Needs To Hear From Us

Posted by Phoenix Woman on May 27, 2010

Call up Congressman Gerry Connolly and ask him why deficit hawkery only applies to things that help average persons instead of war profiteers (erm, “defense” contractors):

Washington DC Office
327 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-1492
Fax: (202) 225-3071

Fairfax District Office
4115 Annandale Road
Suite 103
Annandale, VA 22003
Phone: (703) 256-3071
Fax: (703) 354-1284 

Prince William District Office
4308 Ridgewood Center Dr.
Woodbridge, VA 22192
Phone: (703) 670-4989
Fax: (703) 670-6042

You know what to do. (Oh, and you might also want to add that Pete Peterson, the guy bankrolling the Cat Food (erm, Deficit) Commission, is demonstrably full of horsepucky.)

Posted in 'starving the beast', (Rich) Taxpayers League, deficit, Pete Peterson, Social Security | Comments Off on Somebody Needs To Hear From Us

%d bloggers like this: