Tag Archives: Washington Post

Feckless? I Don’t Think So, Mitt

07 Wednesday Mar 2012

Posted by in Iran, Obama, Politics, Romney

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

As I was reading Mitt Romney’s saber-rattling, tough talking, op-ed on Iran in the Washington Post yesterday, what jumped out at me was where Romney called President Obama “America’s most feckless president since Carter,” Feckless. Unsure of the meaning I did what any self-respecting 21st century American would do–I Googled it. Here’s what I found:

feck·less
adj.
1. Lacking purpose or vitality; feeble or ineffective.
2. Careless and irresponsible.

Careless and irresponsible. Maybe it’s just me, but I would consider the epitome of carelessness and irresponsibility in an American president to be rushing headlong into another war. Another war based on dubious claims from the usual suspects that if we don’t act immediately we face the imminent threat of seeing mushroom clouds over American cities. Haven’t we been here before?

President Obama properly addressed Romney, and the other Republican presidential candidates who have pretty much echoed Romney’s hawkishness, at his press conference yesterday:

“What’s said on the campaign trail, you know, those folks don’t have a lot of responsibilities,” Obama said. “They’re not commander in chief. And when I see the casualness with which some of these folks talk about war, I’m reminded of the costs involved in war. I’m reminded of the decision that I have to make, in terms of sending our young men and women into battle, and the impacts that has on their lives, the impact it has on our national security, the impact it has on our economy…“This is not a game,” Obama continued. “And there’s nothing casual about it.”

Careless and irresponsible. I don’t think so, Mitt.

One more thing about Romney’s op-ed. He closes with this:

“We can’t afford to wait much longer, and we certainly can’t afford to wait through four more years of an Obama administration. By then it will be far too late.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said much the same thing in his speech at AIPAC:

“Israel has patiently waited for the international community to resolve this issue. We’ve waited for diplomacy to work, we’ve waited for sanctions to work. None of us can afford to wait much longer,” he said.”

One thing to keep in mind when listening to the ‘we can’t wait’ crowd in Israel and in America. This ain’t the first time these boys have cried wolf:

1984: West German intelligence sources [say] that Iran’s production of a bomb “is entering its final stages.” US Senator Alan Cranston claims Iran is seven years away from making a weapon.

1992: Israeli parliamentarian Benjamin Netanyahu tells his colleagues that Iran is 3 to 5 years from being able to produce a nuclear weapon – and that the threat had to be “uprooted by an international front headed by the US.”

1992: Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres tells French TV that Iran was set to have nuclear warheads by 1999.

[I]n early 1992 a task force of the House Republican Research Committee claimed that there was a “98 percent certainty that Iran already had all (or virtually all) of the components required for two or three operational nuclear weapons.”

1995: The New York Times conveys the fears of senior US and Israeli officials that “Iran is much closer to producing nuclear weapons than previously thought” – about five years away – and that Iran’s nuclear bomb is “at the top of the list” of dangers in the coming decade.

1998:..Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld reports to Congress that Iran could build an intercontinental ballistic missile – one that could hit the US – within five years.

‘Nuff said.

Axelrod in Wonderland

24 Friday Sep 2010

Posted by in financial reform, health care, Obama administration, Politics, special interests, too big to fail, Wall Street

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

David Axelrod in yesterday’s Washington Post:

“Pundits will spend a lot of time predicting who will win in November. But more is at stake than the fate of Democrats or Republicans. What’s at stake is whether the powerful corporate special interests will go back to writing our laws or whether our democracy will remain where it belongs — in the hands of the American people.”

What color is the sky in the land where unicorns run free, Dave? “Go back?” They never left. Former insurance company lobbyists and executives wrote the lion’s share of health care “reform.” Your boss cut a backroom deal with the pharmaceutical industry to ensure their monopoly remained intact. Did the big banks get broken up by so-called financial reform? Hell no. Is too big to fail still around? Hell yes. Does the military-industrial complex still get the same blank check that they’ve always had? Absolutely.

FYI, Mr. Axelrod, we no longer have a democracy in America. The correct term is oligarchy.

The Return of the “Social Security is Going Broke” Myth

26 Tuesday May 2009

Posted by in Obama, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

As if there wasn’t enough panic coming from the Republicans in D.C. (along with some Democrats like Harry Reid) about detainees from Gitmo being re-located to American suburbia, now comes the obligatory ‘Social Security is going broke’ myth from one of the usual suspects on the right, Robert Samuelson, columnist for the Washington Post.

”The recession had made everything worse…trust funds run dry; promised benefits exceed dedicated payroll taxes…retirees would scream. Hospitals might shut.” Chicken Little Samuelson cries.

Mr. Samuelson’s solution?

“It’s increasingly obvious that Congress and the president (regardless of the party in power) will deal with the political stink bomb of an aging society only if forced. And the most plausible means of compulsion would be for Social Security and Medicare to go bankrupt.”

Good idea, let them both go away, paving the way for another all-time greatest hit from Samuelson and his fellow travelers, privatization. (Note: the preceding contains sarcasm).

Just a couple of problems with the panic scenario. One, Social Security isn’t going broke. Two, the fiscal outlook for Social Security and Medicare are completely different. Of course the privatizers know this, they just like to lump them together to make the numbers bigger and scarier.

“About a decade ago, conservative and libertarian economists who oppose Social Security, Medicare and other entitlements came up with a clever rhetorical strategy. They would calculate the gap between the payroll taxes that pay for these programs and estimated costs over time. But there was one problem: The gap isn’t all that scary, at least in the near future.

So in order to frighten the American people and their elected leaders, deficit hawks cite the sum total of Social Security’s “unfunded liabilities” over 75 years. But even this — a paltry $4.3 trillion over three-quarters of a century, according to the 2008 report — isn’t sufficiently terrifying.  [So they combine Medicare and SS]

[This] produces a suitably spooky 75-year shortfall of $42.9 trillion. And if this is not alarming enough, deficit hawks can cite the truly apocalyptic figure of $101.7 trillion in combined “entitlement” spending over an infinite time horizon.

The anti-Social Security lobby always presents the “unfunded liabilities” of “entitlements” in scary dollar terms, rather than as percentage points of GDP. Here’s why: Over the next 75 years, the Social Security shortfall at most hovers around 1 percent of total U.S. GDP over that same period.”

Samuelson claims that Social Security will run out of money by 2037. Never mind the fact that this projection is based on an annual economic growth rate of 2.6% and the average annual growth rate since the Civil War is  nearly 3 percent.

At a rate of 3%, Social Security is solvent for 75 years, not 28.

Even using the conservative estimates, an increase in the payroll tax from 12.4% to 14.4% would completely eliminate the shortfall.

Medicare is a problem right now. But President Obama’s proposed health care reform would go a long way towards solving it.

“Medicare is entirely different. It’s a monster. But fixing it has everything to do with slowing the rate of growth of medical costs — including, let’s not forget, having a public option when it comes to choosing insurance plans under the emerging universal health insurance bill. With a public option, the government can use its bargaining power with drug companies and suppliers of medical services to reduce prices.”

So you see, no need to panic, Republicans. Resume focusing on KSM being your next door neighbor.