Lieberman: No Labels Movement Blames Hyperpartisanship as Source of Violence

Last month a group of individuals launched a program called the "No Labels Movement." The goal is not to create a third party and simply align with independent voters but to encourage bi-partisanship and accept members of all parties, democrats, republicans, and independents. Currently the project is small, with hopes of growing a much larger effort placing a central office and operation in each of the 435 Congressional districts nationwide. Members are invited to join weekly organizational and motivational speaking meetings via conference call.

Due to the recent and tragic event concerning the shooting of Representative Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) and some of her constituents the movement has taken a statement against hyper-partisanship within the media, characterizing the sharp dichotomy between liberal and right wing media outlets as one of the main causes of action from individuals like Jared Lee Loughner.

Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) was the guest during the speaker portion of the No Labels call today. When asked whether he thought the media will moderate its typical vitriol and hyperpartisanship in lieu of the Gabby Gifford tragedy, Lieberman replied generally:

" There is a serious impact of violence in the media on children, there is a numbing relationship between violence on TV and in real life." He hopes that there will be a shift in the way media handles and relays information to the public.

Lieberman fielded questions from the movements members for roughly 30 minutes about his relationship to Giffords and how to stop this fervent separation of parties. Lieberman noted that he only met the Congresswoman a few times but said was:

" civil, a decent and kind person, she took issue one by one based on what made sense for her district..she was an accessible listener."

In closing remarks, Senator Lieberman noted that he respected Congressman John Boehner's and Congressman Eric Cantor's decision to place congress in a non-argumentative state this week and refraining from the repeal of health care proposal that the republicans had scheduled which was sure to be a stirring and partisan debate.

The "Fox Newsation" of the Republican Party.

Washington Post. Friday. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO), a nonpartisan, cost-counting branch of Congress, found that repeal/deletion/killing of the recently passed "bad boy Obamacare" health care reform would cost the nation's deficit a cool $230 billion dollars. The article also noted Speaker Boehner's tactical denial of the CBO's competence and the Republican's subsequent conservative report on the issue. Sounds like propaganda to me.

This is what nudges my navel: deflection of analysis completed by the most reputable numbers agency in DC is practicing more of the ignorance the American people no longer need. The Conservative refute of the CBO's findings on health care is the same type of pooh-bear logic Ray Comfort sports against evolution. Like a kid plugging his ears and stomping his feet, we've got some of the supposed leaders of free America booing mom's tussin. What do they do? Release THEIR OWN report on the issue. Instead of supporting their own evidence, they paraphrase the authority: using clever choppings similar to the ones the Beckster and Bill No Smiley use to increase their book sales on glass half empty truisms. For example, Washington Post states:

-Using a partial quote from a Congressional Budget Office study, the Republican report suggested that the nonpartisan office agreed that the law will cause significant job losses. In fact, what the CBO actually said was that the law will "reduce the amount of labor used in the economy by a small amount." In the Republican report "small amount" was replaced by an ellipsis.-

Cool, except the whole selling point of the repeal bill is in the name of it, "Repealing the Jobs-Killing Health Care Act." Weak start to an argument.

I am bothered by this. The 'pubs made legitimate promises to their constituencies to repeal the health care bill. However their pathway toward this has turned to misleading practices, sweeping facts under the carpet in order to ride populist fervor. The Fox Newsation of the Republican Party. It is obvious this implausible deniability must be coming from some higher monetary source. The tea party has seemed to dim since the election, but I'm positive that any ideas proposed by Democrats, even those with conservative roots, will meet surprising stopping power from grassroots people paradoxically working against their own interets. Look at these arguments and try and see if they make any logical sense? It's emotion manifested in angry rebellion, poked in the ass by a few big boys that know how trickle-down really works.

Id Rather Live in Palin's Alaska Than Bachmans US

Early this morning Michelle Bachmann, Representative to the 6th District of Minnesota, was interviewed by FOX news. The topic of the hour was whether Ms. Bachmann was truly considering a bid for presidency after her recent announcement to arrive in Iowa one week earlier than likely GOP Candidate, Governor and fellow Minnesotan, Tim Pawlenty. She has not announced that she will be putting a bid into what seems to be a very full slate for the GOP Primary, but her press shop is certainly not denying it stating, "nothing is off the table."- Sergio Gor

Like I said, she has not announced but here is a few lines from the interview this morning, make of it what you will:

VAN SUSTEREN: "All right, I know why you're going to Iowa. Now let me go back to my question. Are you going to run in 2012?"

BACHMANN: "Well, I am not focused on my own personal ambitions. What I am focused on very clearly is to make sure that we cannot continue to go down the road we do. I brought one chart that I want to share with you. This is the debt that was accumulated under President Bush, all of these red lines. This is just two years under President Obama.

That's what I'm nervous about, and that's why I'm very committed to doing whatever I can to make sure that we don't have a second term for President Obama. So I'm going to add my voice to that conversation in the next two years."

VAN SUSTEREN: All right. One last question on this. What would go - - I know that you haven't said no. You haven't said yes, but you haven't said no. What would -- what are your considerations? What would convince you that maybe you should run for president? And what would discourage you?

BACHMANN: Well, I just think that's the wrong question to ask for the next year. I think the next year shouldn't be about necessarily who is the personality. That's why it's not about my personal ambition. But it is about making sure that people know what the issues are, what the principles are, because I think a year from now -- I mean, can you imagine two years of speculating about who the nominee will be?

VAN SUSTEREN: "But that's what we -- I mean, that -- but someone's going to announce in the next couple of weeks, probably."

BACHMANN: "(INAUDIBLE) fatiguing. It is boring. I think what we need to do is make sure that we understand -- this is very serious business. And I am committed to making sure that this will not be our future because the debt ceiling is a huge issue"

In the winter of 2009 I went to work out on a democratic primary taking place in the 6th district of Minnesota between State Senate Minority leader Taryl Clark and unlikely newcomer, Dr. Maureen Reed. The winner of this battle was to take on Bachmann in the Fall of 2010. As expected Clark won the nomination of all the labor unions being a long standing political figure, and sure enough fell in the only conservative district of Minnesota to Bachmann on November 3rd. With the tea party members, tax activists, angry Midwestern women, and the wind on her back, Michelle Bachmann has the confidence to throw herself in the mix and protest Barrack Obama the best way she knows how; run for President of the United States.

"If the 2012 GOP ticket is Palin/Bachmann, it might be the right time to fulfill my lifelong dream of studying abroad."

Gibbs To Leave White House

Little is known at this time other than the fact that White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs has announced to his staff that he will be leaving his position completely. The Huffington Post has released the announcement but no additional information has been provided. Gibbs has been an adviser since the beginning of Barack Obama in 2004, setting out as a Senator on his path to Presidency. He was a member of the original trio; David Axelrod, David Plouffe, and Robert Gibbs. One the campaign trail he was the entire backstage operation to Obama's voice, writing virtually all press releases and speeches for the reputably well-spoken President.

Why the aberration? I personally attribute it to the stress. Who wants to deal with all this shit everyday? Constantly forced to develop stories and twist truth to cover and uncover the inner working of the ever-complex oval office. The Washington Post speculates that Gibbs is simply moving on to bigger and more profitable things. A government salary is substantial, but creating your own consulting company for campaigns has potential to be much more lucrative. Having the title as of "Press Secretary" to the most powerful man in America on your resume definitely bolsters your credibility as a sagacious political consultant, not to mention all the inside knowledge this guy has accrued over the past 7 years.

With the new Congress in place, is Gibbs simply running away from adversity and what is sure to add a few more gray hairs on his head, or is his decision purely driven by financial success and personal achievement desire? It will be interesting to see who will take his place. Currently the highest bidder is JP Morgan executive and former Secretary of Commerce Bill Daley. I look forward to seeing if this resignation is a start of a pattern in an unusually stable executive branch staff.

Hope for the Holidays

I moved down to the Washington, DC metro area in early September. Jobless, with my fingers crossed, I was fortunate to get an offer to join the FireDogLake team. Joyous with my new employment and the mitigation of my financial anxiety, I started to look for places that I could give back to the community. A friend recommended doing some work at Martha’s Table. Their mission is to provide nutritional, educational, and community support for the homeless. Their main focus is “at risk” children and their families. When I contacted Martha’s Table three weeks before Christmas and asked what I could do to help, they put me on a waiting list. Although discouraging, it was heartwarming to hear that we live in a country where even in times of hardship for the average household there are lots of charitable souls trying to help out during the holiday season.

I waited a week to hear back from them and decided it was time to take action. My roommate and fellow alum of Roger Williams University, Sebastian Herrick and I decided to help out in the most direct way we knew how. We went to Dupont Circle, entered Krispy Kreme in Santa hats and exited with 36 glazed donuts and enough coffee for the New York Giants. We then proceeded to walk around town handing out a donut and coffee to the homeless in DC. At Union Station we were greeted by a large group of individuals who were all incredibly thankful for our warm treats, although some people were not interested.

A couple approached us outside the train station shaking cold, strapped with backpacks, and chapped lips. They had traveled from California by foot and bus in the pursuit of happiness and new beginnings. Stranded in DC with nothing but the clothes on their back and the pins that held their bags shut, they asked if we could give them some coffee. At this point I realized that two months ago I was doing the same thing, wandering around DC hoping to find my way. I am fortunate to have the support of family and friends to assist me, and although some coffee and a donut is hardly going to change their lives, it’s a small gesture that I hope these people can continue to find wherever their travels take them.

(Original Post)

Will DADT Save Lieberman?

I have had mixed feelings about Joe Lieberman since he has been in office. He has repetitively flip-flopped on issues since day one, looking after numero uno. If you recall Lieberman shifted his opinion on the health care bill after being an overall supporter. His reasoning was medicare expansion. He went as far as to propose it in previous legislation, then just before the bill comes to the floor in HR 3200, he claims he wont vote for it if it includes expansion to medicare. Anyways, as my respect for Lieberman runs about as deep as a puddle in the desert, I do commend him on his efforts with Don't Ask Don't tell.

For the second time this year the House of Reps passed the bill that would allow gays to enlist openly in the military, and it could be the second time this year that the Senate Blocks it. Shockingly enough Lieberman is doing what the President should be doing, standing up and not taking no for an answer. The excuses to not repeal DADT; the bill should be a stand alone bill, and "I am not voting on anything until the tax cut bill is resolved," are unacceptable.

Republican Senators Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, Scott Brown and Olympia Snowe have all said they will vote for a stand-alone DADT repeal bill, however these same inviduals have been known to say one thing and filibuster the next, many of these republicans do not like everything in the defense authorization bill that encompasses DADT. Brown, who may hold the key vote in this, released a press statement saying, "If and when a stand-alone repeal bill comes up for a vote, he will support it." It will take Joe Lieberman standing strong to pull in the Republican votes.

Is the Senator from CT trying to just appear a savior for the LBGT community for his own good? Probably, but that doesn't make him look any less like a hero in this situation on a rule that is long past due to be repealed. Too bad our President cant muster enough courage to stand up to the GOP the way Joe is standing up to both parties here. As an aside, if this bill does finally get repealed, its a subtle sign to President Obama that its time to face Congress, as opposed to being reticent and introverted.
WATCH HERE!

Poll Finds People are For Tax Cuts. It Shall Pass.

Though Ryan Christopher WISHES it could be his last post on tax cuts, I think we are in for a blowhole of new influx. The Senate vote today is at noon and the Senate tax cut bill is expected to win by an overwhelming margin. The debate will have to move to the House when this happens. It will be rushed to a vote before the year ends in order to keep all working Americans relieved of taxes and give most unemployed a fighting chance to succeed. Politico reports this morning that 20 house Republicans will be against this bill, which means only 60 of 255 Democrats are needed for the bill to pass. Not a lot. In addition, a new Washington Post-ABC News pollshows that 69 percent of Americans support the tax compromise. Some hardcore conservative and progressive liberal constituencies may be miffed at this compromise, which may make a few votes nay. However, this compromise is important to fueling the economy. Money has been blocked from circulating, companies are holding dollars rather than hiring, and the fragile upbeat of the economy could be muted without this help. The leadership knows this and will not turn down such a political gift; this bipartisan and constituent compromise.