Watch. Laugh. Enjoy.

PART ONE

PART TWO

PART THREE

Yes, I think Stewart dismantles him and O’Reilly’s assertion that Beck representss. the “everyman” is scary and laughable. Beck directs 95% of his anger at Dems and spankss the GOP occasionally. He also calls himself a conservative, so I have no idea what O’Reilly is talking about, but there it is nonetheless.

Fox did cut some of the interview out and they said they posted in on their site, but I certainly can’t find it. Gawker has all of the missing clips.

The Tea Party protests last spring could have been the start of something important in American politics had it not been for the vocal group of far right wingers who insisted on leveling all sorts of racially charged attacks at Obama and his supporters.

Well, this weekend they’re holding their convention in Nashville, Tennessee and former Congressman Tom Tancredo was a speaker.

And boy did he deliver the red meat.

And boy did the crowd eat it up.

Check it out…

Yes, that’s just the type of hearty, bombastic rhetoric that builds strong coalitions of independent and swing voters.

I also liked how he talked about voting tests in one breath and socialism in the next, thus proving that irony is indeed dead…and least in Nashville this weekend.

Well done Tom!

Digg This! • Stumble It! • Add to Mixx! • Share on Facebook • Discuss on Newsvine • Add to del.icio.us

Digg This! • Stumble It! • Add to Mixx! • Share on Facebook • Discuss on Newsvine • Add to del.icio.us

For whatever reason, this talk isn’t embeddable right now, but the talk was good (you can see it here.

It certainly wasn’t as contentious as his talk with Republicans, but Obama fielded some tough questions from his own party, particular by Senators like Blanche Lincoln. She shared a story about a constituent of hers who said he doesn’t think the White House understands what it means to try and make payroll every week.

Obama responded and The Hill has more…

Obama responded by defending steps his administration has taken to right the economy and said “Moving forward, Blanche, what you’re going to hear from some folks…[is that] the only way to provide stability is to go back and do what we did before the crisis.”

The president reiterated that he would not return to past policies.

“If the price of certainty is for us to adopt the exact same proposals that were in place for eight years leading up to the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression…the result is going to be the same.”

But Obama conceded that “Blanche is right that we sometimes get bogged down in ideology.”

Once again, Obama comes off as not only highly knowledgeable about every single topic, but also can defend why he has made the decisions he has made at every turn…something his predecessor couldn’t or wouldn’t do.

All I can say is I hope he continues these talks with both sides because this is the type of dialogue we need to see. In other words, this should be the standard, not the exception.

Fingers crossed.

Digg This! • Stumble It! • Add to Mixx! • Share on Facebook • Discuss on Newsvine • Add to del.icio.us

I know a lot of folks are talking about how Obama “schooled” Republicans today, but let’s get past that. Yes, if you watch the following Obama comes off extremely well. But can we focus on whether or not this type of dialogue is good for the country? I’d say yes, yes, a thousand times YES!, as this is one of the first truly substantive steps Obama has taken to bridging the gap between the Ds and Rs during his tenure.

Check out the dialogue here and tell us what you think in the comments…

Long story short, don’t fall for the media’s/blogosphere’s talking points about Obama winning. Because that’s the tired, combative narrative they want you to fall for. If we’re to truly move forward and have a constructive debate, we have to look at this for what it is…a productive dialogue that will hopefully lead to more. On this point I hope we can all agree.

More in a month…fingers crossed.

Digg This! • Stumble It! • Add to Mixx! • Share on Facebook • Discuss on Newsvine • Add to del.icio.us

Jobs may not be coming back, but the GDP is.

From Reuters:

The first estimate put fourth-quarter gross domestic product growth at its fastest pace since the third quarter of 2003. The economy expanded at a 2.2 percent annual rate in the third quarter.

Analysts polled by Reuters had forecast GDP, which measures total goods and services output within U.S. borders, growing at a 4.6 percent rate in October-December period.

Growth was boosted a sharp slowdown in the pace of inventory liquidation, a factor that could mask the strength of the economic recovery from the longest and deepest downturn since the Great Depression.

But what do some economists say?

JOHN SILVIA, CHIEF ECONOMIST, WELLS FARGO SECURITIES, CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA: “The overall number came in as we had expected and the real story is final sales, which continue to be positive. The final sales is a reflection on consumer spending, which is good to see, and business investment and software equipment and the federal government. We do have sustained economic growth and it is not a “V” recovery. The economy continues to improve, but we do not have an economic boom here. This implies the Fed will be on hold and is consistent with the Fed’s minutes. The Fed must be pleased with the economic growth and the inflation number remains pretty low, which is important. For an economist, this is a good report… This shows the economy is healing and doing okay.”

ROBERT MACINTOSH, CHIEF ECONOMIST, EATON VANCE CORP, BOSTON: “It is surprisingly strong. It seemed like people were downgrading what they thought it was going to be as the week went on, and then all of a sudden this is way on the outside edge of any kind of range of consensus. I have to take a look at it but I suspect it has to do with less of a drawdown of some inventories and maybe some trade, but this is certainly very surprising. I’m not sure what this does for the Fed, but since this is the advanced report it is subject to some pretty significant downgrades as they get real numbers on both exports and inventories. I doubt it will stay this high once they revise it twice.”

BORIS SCHLOSSBERG, DIRECTOR FOR CURRENCY RESEARCH, GLOBAL FOREX TRADING, NEW YORK: “Wow, it’s a big headline. Net-net it is a positive report and we are seeing a spike up in many markets. But after the initial impact, one has to rethink this number and note that some underlying drivers to growth are still underperforming. Most of the jump in the headline GDP figure came from a rebuild in inventories, which is to be expected.”

So is it shocking? No, but it’s definitely better than expected, and in the black art that is economics, this is a good sign.

But why hasn’t employment picked backed up? Because, as many of you know, employment has always been a lagging indicator anyway. Companies are always gun shy about hiring people that they may need to let go soon after. But with news like this my guess is that employers will start adding staff. They don’t want to get caught unprepared when things finally do turn around.

More as it develops…

Digg This! • Stumble It! • Add to Mixx! • Share on Facebook • Discuss on Newsvine • Add to del.icio.us

And away we go…

So, what did you think?

Digg This! • Stumble It! • Add to Mixx! • Share on Facebook • Discuss on Newsvine • Add to del.icio.us

Cross posted to FrankHagan.com

Digg This! • Stumble It! • Add to Mixx! • Share on Facebook • Discuss on Newsvine • Add to del.icio.us

First, the relevant facts about the budget that’s set to be released on Feb 1…

About $447 billion will be devoted to funding the government — the parts that aren’t mandated by law (the entitlements) or aren’t related to defense, intelligence, veterans or national security issues. Obama will promise to veto any budget that exceeds that threshold, NOT adjusted for inflation, over the next three years. $250 billion would be saved over the baseline.

So now…what does it mean?

Well, it’s not an overall freeze and nobody from the White House ever said it was. But the media has been reporting it is as such, and, well…yeah.

The truth is that some spending will go up, like money for health care, clean energy and education. Other spending will be go down.

More on that from TPM:

The cuts would target “duplicative,” “ineffective” and “inefficient” spending withing government, the official said on a conference call with reporters.

“This is not a blunt, across-the-board freeze,” the official said, adding that some agencies will see spending increases while some will see spending cuts as the total remains constant.

Naturally, the knee jerk blogosphere is crying foul and Krugman is up in arms…

And it’s a betrayal of everything Obama’s supporters thought they were working for. Just like that, Obama has embraced and validated the Republican world-view — and more specifically, he has embraced the policy ideas of the man he defeated in 2008. A correspondent writes, “I feel like an idiot for supporting this guy.”

I’m sorry…where exactly is he embracing the policies of McCain? Because his officials decided to use the word freeze to accurately talk about the spending that won’t go up?

Jeezus…I really hate my party sometimes.

But, to the point of the post…what does mean for you? It’s not complicated. More or your tax dollars will be spent on things that directly effect the economy and less will be spent on things that don’t. So, eventually, some of it might find its way back to your pocket because the economy picks up sooner rather than later.

More as it develops…

Digg This! • Stumble It! • Add to Mixx! • Share on Facebook • Discuss on Newsvine • Add to del.icio.us

Last week President Obama announced the “Volcker Rule” proposing tough constraints on big banks. During the announcement Barney Frank stood behind the president on the podium in visual support of the policy. As noted in my last post, the Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee then proceeded directly to an interview on CNBC, the media outlet that is arguably the most direct conduit to the banking industry affected by that policy. In the interview Barney Frank soft pedaled the impact of the proposed policy, saying it would not go into effect for 3 – 5 years.

Yesterday, in a background briefing, the administration announced a three year spending freeze on portions of the budget. Since departments with the fastest growing government expenditures like Defense, VA, the State Department, and entitlements are excluded from the “freeze”, it will have a negligible effect on the ballooning deficit. NYT:

“The payoff in budget savings would be small relative to the deficit: The estimated $250 billion in savings over 10 years would be less than 3 percent of the roughly $9 trillion in additional deficits the government is expected to accumulate over that time.”

Shortly after the announcement, Jared Bernstein, economist and economic adviser to Vice President Biden, appeared on the Rachel Maddow Show – the media outlet that is arguably the most direct conduit to the progressive community. Mr. Bernstein proceeds to soft pedal even the very modest impact the policy would have on deficits, almost apologizing for it, and practically promising that the administration will really continue to be the big spenders that the progressives know and love. Maddow wasn’t buying what Jared was selling:

I am sure the President will clear all of this up in the State of the Union address tomorrow.

Digg This! • Stumble It! • Add to Mixx! • Share on Facebook • Discuss on Newsvine • Add to del.icio.us

The Massachusetts special election to fill Ted Kennedy’s seat continues to reverberate (or is that ricochet?) in the media [for a quick round-up of latest Charlie Cook in National Journal, Robert Reich on Huffington Post, Dan Balz in Washington Post and Kristi Keck on CNN, see today's Hankster] and independent voters remain center stage (the newly elected Senator is that guy who posed nude for Cosmo, right?…) To wit:

It’s been a bad week for Democrats. Republican Scott Brown won the special election for the Senate seat formerly held by Sen. Ted Kennedy, leading to predictions that the House and Senate will not be able to cram through their strictly partisan health care reform bill. To add to the nervousness already felt by the Dems, the Supreme Court struck down components of campaign finance reform that favors incumbents and Democrats specifically.

But the GOP shouldn’t sit back and gloat. There is a unique opportunity to actually work with the Democratic leadership and get some things done that remain popular with the American people. And failure to act on them may expose the GOP to the same anti-incumbent mood that swept them from the majority in 2006. USA Today reports:

A 55% majority of Americans say President Obama and congressional Democrats should suspend work on the health care bill that has been on the verge of passage and consider alternatives that would draw more Republican support, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds.

. . .

An overwhelming 72% of those surveyed Wednesday say Brown’s victory “reflects frustrations shared by many Americans, and the president and members of Congress should pay attention to it.” Just 18% say it “reflects political conditions in Massachusetts and doesn’t have a larger meaning for national politics.”

What kind of reforms should the GOP put forward? There are a number of blocked proposals the Dem leadership should now allow on the floor for debate. From the GOP.gov website:

For more information about some of the other common-sense health care reforms proposed by Republicans, please visit the links below:

• Empowering Patients First Act  (Republican Study Committee  Health Care Reform Bill, introduced July 30, 2009)
• Improving Health Care for All Americans Act (Shadegg Health Care Reform Bill, introduced July 14, 2009)
• Medical Rights & Reform Act   (Kirk-Dent Health Care  Reform Bill, introduced June 16, 2009)
• Help Efficient, Accessible, Low-cost, Timely Healthcare (HEALTH) Act   (Gingrey medical liability reform bill, introduced June 6, 2009)  
• Small Business Health Fairness Act of 2009   (Johnson small business health plans bill, introduced May 21, 2009)
• Promoting Health and Preventing Chronic Disease through  Prevention and Wellness Programs for Employees, Communities, and Individuals Act of 2009   (Castle Wellness & Prevention Bill, introduced July 31, 2009)
• Improved Employee Access to Health Insurance Act of 2009  (Deal auto-enrollment bill, introduced October 15, 2009)
• Health Insurance Access for Young Workers and College Students Act of 2009  (Blunt bill to improve health insurance coverage of dependents, introduced October 21, 2009)

The Heritage Foundation, a leading conservative think tank, explains these bills further, and points to several “guiding principles” that Republicans can support in other proposals:

Tax Equity: Today, if an individual purchases health insurance through their employer, they receive unlimited tax breaks on the value of their insurance. But if you purchase your insurance on your own, you receive no such benefit. This is inequitable and regressive. Ideally, Congress could replace the current tax exclusion with a system of universal tax credits. But at the very least, Congress should provide tax relief for those who purchase coverage on their own, and redirect other health care spending to help low-income individuals and families purchase private health insurance coverage.

State-Based Reform: Every state is different when it comes to health care challenges. Some states face high rates of uninsured citizens while others face spiraling costs. Instead of a federal one-size-fits-all approach, Congress should embrace federal-state partnerships that preserve diversity in the states. The states could devise their own way to achieve reform, like a mechanism for portability (i.e. take your insurance from job to job). Individuals should also have the freedom to purchase insurance from any trusted source and not be restricted by where they live (i.e. buying insurance across state lines).

Entitlement Reform: Not only are Medicare and Medicaid increasingly costly, they’re not delivering value to American taxpayers. If health providers could compete directly for the business of seniors and the poor, the cost-curve would truly be bent and private innovation would flourish. Right now, the tsunami of entitlement spending is on an automatic course for disaster, with locked-in spending, and more to come. Long-term costs of entitlement programs must be built into the annual budget process so Congress can no longer ignore the crisis that is continually pushed off on future generations. Americans can no longer blindly pay into an entitlements system that offers little incentives to providers to offer better value to the consumer and the funding taxpayer.

There is a difference between saying “no” to a bad plan, and just saying “no”. The task for the GOP will be to come up with common sense alternatives that people can support.

Cross posted to FrankHagan.com

Digg This! • Stumble It! • Add to Mixx! • Share on Facebook • Discuss on Newsvine • Add to del.icio.us

Jackie Salit, president of IndependentVoting.org issued the following statement yesterday:

“The Obama team needs to learn a lesson from Massachusetts. If you don’t attend to the political dynamics in the independent movement, you’ll pay the price. That movement is in the early stages of its development and is subject to many pushes and pulls. While the progressive leadership of the movement played the key role in swinging independents to Obama in 2008, the Obama team has turned a blind eye since then, choosing instead to focus only on the Democratic Party base. But if you do that, instead of finding ways to cultivate the progressive voices in independent politics, you’re going to lose elections like the one yesterday. And, you might even lose the White House if you don’t wake up to the fact that there is an emerging political universe – the independent movement – that you know nothing about.”

Digg This! • Stumble It! • Add to Mixx! • Share on Facebook • Discuss on Newsvine • Add to del.icio.us

And I agree. Because even though Kennedy championed this health care legislation, Massachusetts didn’t elect a Dem this time around. That’s how democracy works.

From The Hill…

“In many ways the campaign in Massachusetts became a referendum not only on health care reform but also on the openness and integrity of our government process,” Webb said in a statement. “To that end, I believe it would only be fair and prudent that we suspend further votes on health care legislation until Senator-elect Brown is seated.”

The statement from the centrist Webb is a warning shot to Democratic leaders who are now forced to confront how to move forward with health reform efforts and other top priorities in the wake of Brown’s victory. Republicans now control 41 votes in the Senate, meaning they will have enough votes to sustain a filibuster if they all stick together.

The issue is critically important to healthcare, as well. Some lawmakers had talked about rushing to finish their health reform efforts before Brown could be seated, which could take as long as 10 to 15 days under Massachusetts law.

However, the other part of democracy is that Brown won by 52% to 47%.

So if a simple majority is good enough for Massachusetts, it’s good enough for health care legislation.

Yes, going that route will be painful. But that’s where we’re at now.

Digg This! • Stumble It! • Add to Mixx! • Share on Facebook • Discuss on Newsvine • Add to del.icio.us

The results aren’t final yet, but it looks like Brown is going to win 52% to 47%.

And you have to hand it to him. He ran a great campaign and defeated the favorite Martha Coakley in a race that many Democrats thought would be a cake walk.

But let’s remember that Republicans being elected in this state isn’t without precedent. After all, Mitt Romney was Massachusetts’ Governor and passed mandated healthcare that looks a lot like what Obama and the Dems are trying to pass now.

Here’s more info from Rasmussen:

• 78% of Brown voters Strongly Oppose the health care legislation before Congress.
• 52% of Coakley supporters Strongly Favor the health care plan. Another 41% Somewhat Favor the legislation.
• 61% of Brown voters say deficit reduction is more important than health care reform.
• 46% of Coakley voters say health care legislation more important than deficit reduction.
• 86% of Coakley voters say it’s better to pass the bill before Congress rather than nothing at all.
• 88% of Brown voters say it’s better to pass nothing at all.

So this paves the way for the “Obamacare is dead” meme to take shape…even though this is one Senate race. And hey, if this is what kills healthcare reform, then this is what kills it. But I think everybody should realize what killing it means…ZERO progress on one of the most important issues that continues to drive us further and further into debt. And this after the CBO said this plan would reduce our budget deficits.

And if you think Republicans are going to go for the Wyden-Bennett bill, you’re crazy. That’s pipe dream legislation. Americans believe their healthcare should be tied to employment and that’s not going to change any time soon.

One last note…going back to the health care mandate that was passed in Masschusetts by Romney…the state has the lowest percentage of uninsured in the nation (right around 4%) and has covered an additional 439,000 residents.

More as it develops…

Digg This! • Stumble It! • Add to Mixx! • Share on Facebook • Discuss on Newsvine • Add to del.icio.us

Jackie Salit’s analysis of independents’ support of Obama, health care and the current state of the independent movement…

Mass independents are lining up behind Brown in the upcoming special election to fill Ted Kennedy’s seat in the US Senate — ignore the independents at your own peril!

…More and more elected officials are leaving the parties…

Why are California minor parties SOOOOO negative on open primaries? Not sure where Green Party gov candidate Laura Wells stands on the issue (let me know, otherwise, we’ll call her to find out…..)

Mike Bloomberg invested $400K in the NYC Independence Party — is Harold Ford looking in the wrong direction? Hmmm……

More news for independents on The Hankster…

Digg This! • Stumble It! • Add to Mixx! • Share on Facebook • Discuss on Newsvine • Add to del.icio.us

Is there a better political story than the Brown/Coakley special election in Massachusetts? This is a much more exciting contest than either of the playoff games on Sunday. The latest (and last) Public Policy Poll has Brown up by 5 points, the Merriam River Group has him up by 9.7% and a Massachusetts bellweather city poll has him up by 15 points. This live Pollster.com graph is a composite of all polls:

While those crossed hockey sticks are pretty compelling, the outcome remains uncertain. Nate Silver explains why…

… then expands on the risks of trendspotting here. Charlie Cook, like Nate Silver still calls it a toss-up, but unlike Nate, is leaning to Brown. Regardless of whether you agree or trust their political leanings, these are smart analysts. I suspect they are right and this will be a very close race. After all, this is still Massachusetts.
Read the rest of this entry »

Digg This! • Stumble It! • Add to Mixx! • Share on Facebook • Discuss on Newsvine • Add to del.icio.us

Hey gang, I know it’s been a while for me. I still visit The Donk everyday — because where else am I going to get top-notch discussion without all of the ridiculous name-calling — I just haven’t posted in quite some time. For that, I apologize. Although, it’s not like my writing has been missed — there are some really great contributors here (I’m looking at you, Nancy, mw, donar, Frank and The Man himself). Okay, enough chat…

So, I have been following the back-and-forth between NBC, Jay Leno, Conan O’Brien (and every other late-night host) for the past several days. I had a phone conversation with a friend yesterday and together we came to an overwhelming consensus: NBC is stupid.

I am old enough (and fortunate enough) to remember when Johnny Carson hosted The Tonight Show back in the day (which was a Wednesday by the way). Carson hosted the show for what, a billion years? (actually: 30) It seems to me that the host of a long-running show such as TTS eventually becomes the something of a de facto host for a certain generation. Carson was the host for much of the time that my grandparents watched Tonight.

After Johnny retired, Jay Leno took over the reins and sat at the desk for 17 seasons. By my aforementioned ‘de facto host’ rule, Leno has been the host for the Baby Boomers (my parents and folks between the ages of 40 and 65?). Last year, when Leno passed the baton, presumably Conan O’Brien would be the host for my generation (Gen X, Gen Y, Internet, ‘N’, Millenials, et al).

As my friend exclaimed to me over the telephone, “Conan is ‘our’ generation’s Carson or Leno! NBC is losing an opportunity for establishing a long-term brand in Conan O’Brien.” Indeed. I cannot see myself at age 50, sitting on the couch with TPW, and laughing at another ‘Jaywalking’ bit. For my money, ‘In The Year 2000‘ is much more funny.

The National Broadcasting Company is indeed missing an opportunity to carry The Tonight Show franchise to a higher level: the next generation. Add to that this little nugget… the only person who looks good in all of this is Conan O’Brien. Think about that.

1) NBC looks disorganized because they are shuffling hosts around after only a seven-month ‘trial’.

2) Jay Leno looks terrible because — rightly or wrongly — it appears as if he was displeased with his 10 o’clock show and now is turning around and asking for demanding that he get his old show back.

All the while, Conan looks like the proverbial Little Guy on whom the big corporation and big star are picking.

Lastly I’ll just say it: I think Conan is funnier than Leno and Letterman combined (Kimmel definitely has his moments). His nerdy appeal (schtick?) resonantes with me because, well, I’m something of a nerd myself (shocker). Seriously though; what other late-night host would put his show up for sale on Craig’s List:

Yeah. That’s how he rolls.

No matter how this fiasco ends, I’ll be firmly in the column supporting Conan. Here endeth my lesson on late-night-shenanigans. Now we return you to your regularly-scheduled Donklephant programming.

Digg This! • Stumble It! • Add to Mixx! • Share on Facebook • Discuss on Newsvine • Add to del.icio.us