How Many More Senseless Killings Before Meaningful Action Takes Place?

UPDATE:  2:40 with video of Obama speaking to the Nation added

Cannot imagine what a parent would go through after hearing this on the news until they could find their children at the school.  Eighteen of those parents will never be able to talk to their Kindergarten children again.  God be with the parents, family, and friends who are affected by this horrendous shooting.  It brings tears to your eyes to realize that this Christmas, their children won't be with them because of a crazed gunman who had access to guns and ammunition.

This is not only extremely sad but makes your blood boil when you realize that even discussing gun control is off limits.  Time to put it back on the agenda.

If this doesn't wake up America, then nothing will.  There is too much hate in this Country for over a year from the hard right.  Time to wake up and realize something has to be done.

An emotional President Obama is now calling for meaningful action on guns no matter the politics.  I support this 100%.

Will the House GOP Allow Tax Cuts to Expire for All Rather then Raise Taxes on the Wealthy?

The lies and misstatements coming out of Republicans today is nothing short of stunning.  They have jumped the shark so many times that most of us have lost count.  Now Boehner and GOP leadership want to hold the debt ceiling hostage again to get their way and cost the taxpayers more money?  

But Boehner’s fundamental misunderstanding of the debt ceiling (or his willingness to publicly lie about what it does) did not stop him from taking it hostage and threatening to use it to impose his version of “fiscal sanity.” Last year’s debt ceiling debacle ultimately will cost taxpayers $18.9 billion due to the elevated interest rates on U.S. debt issued during that period.

It is great to know that there are more then just a few Republicans who understand the House GOP is in the hip pocket of Norquist along with the Koch Brothers and other major donors. It doesn't seem to make them any difference that mainstream Republicans are against their stance.  They may not like the results in 2014 because many of us will not forgive or forget their willingness to go over the cliff so the tax cuts disappear for all including those under $250,000 rather then raise taxes on the wealthy.  Shows that the wealthy mean more to them then the majority of their voters.   Now that the polls have completely turned on them, will they be willing to deal?  Wouldn't bet my house on that happening with this 'stubborn like a mule' mentality out of a group of Republicans in Congress.

According to a new NBC News poll out last night, the public overwhelmingly believes that the election gave President Obama a “mandate” to: 

• 68 percent: cut taxes for working families earning less than $250,000 a year
• 65 percent: reduce the federal deficit by both increasing taxes on the wealthy and reducing federal spending
• 59 percent: eliminate the Bush tax cuts for those with higher incomes over $250,000

The poll also found that a whopping 76 percent of Americans believe that increasing taxes on the wealthy is an “acceptable” part of any deal to avert the fiscal cliff. This is all consistent with other polls out in recent days, including one that found nearly half of Republicans believe the election delivered the president a mandate to raise taxes on the wealthy. Overall, the poll found that by a 2:1 margin Americans believe the president won both a mandate on taxes and to protect Social Security and Medicare benefits. 

It’s also clear that the Republicans’ intransigence is taking its toll on the already-tarnished image of the party and its leaders:

• 53 percent said they would blame Republicans in Congress if we go over the fiscal cliff. Just 27 percent said they would blame the president.

• Just 25 percent approve of Boehner’s handling of the fiscal showdown, compared to 49 percent who disapprove. Meanwhile, 49 percent approve of the president’s handling of the negotiations and his overall approval rating, 53 percent, is the highest since the killing of Osama bin Laden.

• The three least popular politicians and political institutions in the country are: the Republican party, Boehner, and Mitt Romney. By contrast, Obama is the third most popular, trailing only Bill and Hillary Clinton.

And overall, nearly two-thirds of Americans agree that we need to address our fiscal problems using a balanced approach: 

“Leaders in Congress should make compromises to gain consensus on the budget deficit, even if it means Democrats would have to accept targeted spending cuts in Social Security and Medicare and Republicans would have to accept targeted increases in tax rates.” 

BOTTOM LINE: It’s time for Republicans to heed the will of the American people — and many of their own conservative voters — and agree to a balanced approach that includes asking the wealthiest Americans to pay higher tax rates, just like they did during the economic boom we experience under President Clinton.

This is one big reason that the Republicans in Congress act like they won the election.  Why they are afraid of this man is beyond me:

Norquist made the bizarre Wag the Dog prediction on C-SPAN’s Washington Journal:

NORQUIST: We got lots of things Obama claims to be for, and we will make — we, the Republicans in the House and Senate — will make him actually make those spending restraints, in order to get the continuing resolution out [for] a week, two weeks, a month. Obama will be on a very short leash, fiscally speaking, over the next four years. He’s not gonna have any fun at all. He may decide to go blow up small countries he can’t pronounce because it won’t be any fun to be here, because he won’t be able to spend the kind of cash he was hoping to. 

Watch the video: 

It is noteworthy that Norquist says “we” when referring to the Congressional Republicans. This would seem to conflict with his group’s frequent claim that it is a “a non-partisan coalition of taxpayers and taxpayer groups who oppose all tax increases.” And it seems to ignore the 50 Congressional Republicans who have already distanced themselves from his ironclad oath.

Did those 50 really break from Norquist is the question of the day?  Could it be that they are doing so only for public consumption and will vote with leadership against raising taxes on the wealthy?  We should know shortly if those 50 are telling the truth.  I will have to see their votes to raise taxes on the wealthy before I believe they are serious.

House GOP Fiscal Cliff Arrogant Proposal Permanently Extends Tax Cuts for the Wealthy

Just when I think there is a sliver of light that the Republican Party gets the message from the last election, along comes Speaker Boehner and the obstructionist House Republicans.  Their latest proposal is to permanently extend the tax cuts for the wealthy.  Looks like the Koch Brothers, Adelson, TX Swift Boat Bob Perry, the Chamber of Commerce, and other big donors made their calls and the House GOP leadership asked 'How high do you want us to jump?'

These same bunch of arrogant Republicans have the nerve to say that President Obama didn't make a serious offer?  Any offer of his would be more serious then what these bullheaded Republicans are making.  The American people have spoken they want to raise taxes on the wealthy but these Republicans obviously prefer to believe the fringe that they can roll Obama like they did with the last fiscal cliff.  News to the GOP:  Obama learned his lesson unlike you and is up to the fight as he has the vast majority of the American people behind him.

What is it?  Rand Paul says no to tax hikes for the wealthy along with Norquist and the House Republicans say no tax hikes for the wealthy in their offer.  They are either too dumb to understand the vote on November 6th or they are bought and paid for by the Chamber and major donors who are telling them what to say.  My money is on the latter.  Koch Brothers must be having a field day with taking over the GOP controlling the puppets in Congress who seem to have forgotten they are elected by the people to work for us.  Instead they are giving the American people the shaft once again in favor of their wealthy donors.

Anyone who thinks this group of Republicans in the House would honor their pledge for real tax reform closing loopholes just be smoking something.  Only thing they want to do away with is deductions for the middle class along with going after Social Security and Medicare which are not even part of the budget to pay for their not raising taxes on the wealthy.  No one should trust this group of GOP as they have proven they cannot govern because governing takes compromise.

Cannot write what I would really like to say after reading this article from The Huffington Post that confirmed a CNN report.

GOP Fiscal Cliff Proposal Extends Tax Cuts For The Rich Permanently
Posted: 12/12/2012 1:08 pm EST  |  Updated: 12/12/2012 1:12 pm ESTRyan Grim

WASHINGTON -- House Republicans proposed permanently extending all of the Bush-era income tax rates for the wealthy in their "fiscal cliff" offer made to the White House on Tuesday, according to a CNN report and confirmed by The Huffington Post. 

House Speaker John Boehner and his Republican negotiating partners have said they don't believe the White House has made them a serious offer and that President Barack Obama has refused to budge on spending cuts. Tuesday's suggestion that all the Bush tax cuts be extended permanently was a sharp signal to the White House that Republicans don't feel the president is being reasonable. 

In the fiscal cliff negotiations, Obama has been intent on raising tax rates for income above $250,000 and seems to feel he has the leverage to do so. Permanently extending the current rates is thus a nonstarter with the White House. 

Boehner, for his part, has agreed to as much as $800 billion in additional revenue, but only with commensurate spending cuts. 

Sources from both parties closely involved in the talks say that the gulf between the two positions has barely narrowed over the past month. 

House Republicans say that the permanent extension of the tax rates will be made moot by their push to do comprehensive tax reform. "Our goal, as Boehner has made clear repeatedly and publicly, is a framework for comprehensive tax reform (which would make that claim moot)," said an aide to the speaker. 

The Boehner aide also said that tax reform would raise revenue.  Source:  Huffington Post

Time to vote out the GOP obstructionists in the Congress in 2014 so some work can get done for the American people -- all of us not just the wealthy.  Every day I think the Republican Party in Congress cannot go lower and yet they do -- day after day they sink more.

There are some of us who joined Republicans for Obama in 2012.  Now maybe someone will start a website for Republicans for a House Democrat majority in 2014.  Never in my life did I think I would say that but as a voter I am one of those people who believe you get elected by your Party but once you take your oath, you represent all your constituents not just your Party.  Somewhere that is lost on most of today's Congressional Republicans who are nothing more than puppets to their wealthy donors.

Mickey Edwards (R-OK): Slams Norquist Pledge '"t's not rational. And it's not adult"

Now this is a Conservative I can relate to when it comes to taxes and other issues.  

Edwards, a longtime conservative movement stalwart, attacked his party’s 22-year-long unwillingness to raise taxes as neither conservative, nor adult, nor rational. 

For 22 years the Republican members of Congress have been honoring the Norquist Pledge which is simply stunning that they would be so stupid to let Norquist run the Country when it comes to income tax rates.  Who died and made him king?  Finding out in this article that Norquist designed this plan when he was 12 years old should make Republicans the laughing stock of the Country.

When Moyers noted that Norquist devised his anti-tax pledge as a 12-year-old, Edwards observed “Well, you know, the fact is, the idea that, you know, ‘No, I’m not ever going to do this no matter the circumstances, no matter if we’re at war,’ whatever, it is a 12-year-old kind of thinking.” But, he noted, one “can’t just blame Grover,” as the Congressional signers or the pledge are also to responsible.

How stupid are Republicans in Congress who have signed the Norquist Pledge that was concocted by him as a 12 year old years ago?

Wish he was still my Representative.  He was gone from the House when we moved to Norman.  He talks so much sense and has a way with words (understatement).

Top Conservative Leader Slams Norquist Pledge: ‘It’s Not Rational, And It’s Not Adult’

By Josh Israel on Dec 10, 2012 at 2:10 pm 

Former Rep. Mickey Edwards (R-OK) (Credit: Gia Regan/Yale University Press)

Former Congressman Mickey Edwards (R-OK) lambasted anti-tax activist Grover Norquist and the hundreds of Republicans who have signed his Americans for Tax Reform Pledge in an interview with PBS’s Bill Moyers on Friday. Edwards, a longtime conservative movement stalwart, attacked his party’s 22-year-long unwillingness to raise taxes as neither conservative, nor adult, nor rational. 

Edwards, who served in Congress from 1977 to 1993, was a key architect of the modern conservative movement. He was one of the three founding trustees of the Heritage Foundation, chaired the Republican Policy Committee, and was national chairman of the American Conservative Union for five years. He was also an adviser to Ronald Reagan’s 1980 presidential campaign. 

Asked about the Norquist’s frequent boast that no Congressional Republican has voted to raise taxes since 1990, he told Moyers: 

EDWARDS: It’s certainly not Conservatism. It’s not rational. And it’s not adult. You know, when you create a program, you make a decision. You say, “I think we should conduct this war. I think that we should expand our security apparatus at home. I think that we should provide this additional benefit.” Then you pay for it. You vote to do it. And then you say, “Here’s what it’s going to cost.” And you pay for it. You know, Republicans may complain about the federal debt, but they’re as responsible as the Democrats for the debt being as large as it is. And once you have already done that, then you have an obligation to pay it down. 

You know, so the idea that what you’re going to do is say– you know, “We’re not going to raise taxes, we’re not going to close loopholes, we’re not going to do anything” — that means that we’re not going to pay off what we’ve already created. I mean, that’s childish. That’s childish.

Watch the video: 

If that wasn't enough to make you think these elected members of Congress are not the brightest bulbs in the pack, check this out:

In fiscal cliff negotiations, the only specific proposal Republicans have made to date is demanding $600 billion in Medicare cuts over ten years by denying Medicare coverage to Americans during their first two years of eligibility by raising the eligibility age to 67.  Because the elderly are prone to chronic conditions like cancer and diabetes which can be treated more effectively, and less expensively, with early diagnosis and intervention, it makes little fiscal sense to deny coverage to people aged 65 and 66. The result will lead to more severe infirmities, higher Medicare costs, and early death which may be the Republican’s ulterior motive and another means of cutting Medicare costs over the long haul. 

If Republicans are serious about cutting Medicare costs, they should look at expenditures for unnecessary care, and fraudulent billing for care that is given. Of course, that means Republicans will have to address overtreatment that boosts corporate profits, and especially unnecessary procedures that can lead to pain, disability, and even death in older Americans. Republicans have rejected attempts to rein in unnecessary treatment in the past, and ironically, they used the government-imposed death panels argument to ward off attempts to control excessive treatment when the reality is seniors often suffer ill-effects of profit-driven overtreatment.

Republicans want to cut Medicare costs by raising the age you qualify for Medicare but don't seem to be interested in cutting unnecessary care and fraudulent billing because that helps their big donors.  This cut in Medicare is one thing the Republicans want in exchange for 'daring' to raise taxes on the top 2%.  Don't see what cutting Medicare and Social Security have to do with raising taxes on the top 2%.  Why are Republicans so obstinate in keeping the 2% tax cuts for the wealthy to the stage of alienating voters in various groups plus the middle class?  Having a Presidential candidate run who paid less than 15% in income taxes when he is a multi-millionaire didn't set well with many of us.

One Congressman, Rep John Duncan (R-TN) said he doesn't want to pass the bill to keep the Bush tax rates for those making less than $250,000 because  it would give"control of the floor to the Democrats."  What?  Is that what we have come to in this House -- Democrat bills all bad -- Republican bills all good.  From Igor Volsky at Think Progress comes this gem:

But in a recent photo-op with constituents, Rep. John Duncan (R-TN) explained why Republicans are refusing to give in. The Tennessee Republican admitted that he won’t vote to extend tax cuts to 98 percent of Americans because doing so would cede control to Democrats:

CONSTITUENT 1: Are you going to sign the discharge petition?
DUNCAN: Ummm…Oh no, I’m not. No Ma’am. I’m not about to sign the discharge petition.
CONSTITUENT 2: Well if you sign the discharge petition, you’ll immediately etend the tax cuts for the middle class.
CONSTITUENT 1: Yea, why would you not want to do that? [...]
DUNCAN: It would take too long to explain that. I’m not going to give control of the floor to the Democrats.Watch it:

When you think that Republicans cannot sound any more stupid, someone comes along and proves you wrong.  It is so obvious that Republicans are putting Party over the good of the Country.  There is a simple solution for that problem that can be remedied in 2014 even in gerrymandered districts.  The Democrats need to run candidates that independents and disgruntled Republicans can get behind.  Many of us are  disgusted with the Leadership of the House for playing up and coddling the Tea Party members which makes a 'compromise' impossible.  It is time for Republicans to get a true wake-up call and be defeated for their obstructionism, arrogance, and stubbornness.  When as a Party in the House, you are afraid to let the opposition get the credit, you have lost your way and deserve to be sent to the unemployment line.

CBS Fiscal Cliff Reports (Ben Stein Video on "Eliminating Mortgage Deduction is "Foolish")

Ben Stein has some of the most rational comments I have seen on reasons for keeping the mortgage deduction.  When the GOP first brought up eliminating the mortgage deduction from income tax, it didn't make sense.  Then your realize that the majority of Republicans involved in the talks on the 'fiscal cliff' are millionaires themselves so the mortgage deduction means little to them.  

The mortgage deduction may mean little to the wealthy but for the middle class who own their home, pay a mortgage, and have seen everything else rise, it means lower taxes which is money back in their pocket. It can also make a difference when people go to buy a house as the tax deduction means you can get more house for your money.

The war on the middle class continues today with Republicans talking about eliminating the mortgage deduction.  Why not eliminate the loopholes that have allowed people like Romney, hedge funds, and oil and gas owners to pay less interest then then middle class in income taxes.  Mortgage interest, medical, state taxes, and charitable donations need to stand at least for those making under $250,000.  I actually have no problem with those standing for everyone for their main property.  

Do Republicans want to send the housing marking into a tailspin by eliminating the mortgage deduction in order to make Obama look bad?.  Note to Republican leadership:  You lost and Obama is not running again.  Middle class Republicans are starting to turn on House Republicans for bottling up the bill that would continue tax cuts on the middle class.  They never had the Democrats support but now they are losing Republican support some of which they may never get back.

Republicans need to listen to Ben Stein and quit thinking like a millionaire and remember the roots a lot of them came from which was not millionaire status.  

9 December 2014Stein: Eliminating mortgage deduction is "foolish" 

Play CBS News Video 

The "Fiscal Cliff" 

(CBS News) The battle over how to reduce the federal deficit continues this week in Washington. One of the suggestions under consideration doesn't pass muster with our contributor Ben Stein: 

My late father, the economist Herbert Stein, had a few favorite quotations.

One of them was from a European thinker named Oxenstierna, if I have that name right. The quote went simply, "Observe, my son, with what little wisdom the world is governed." 

This comes to mind as our nation is convulsed by fiscal problems, especially a titanic budget deficit. 

This bipartisan mess, caused by GOP tax cuts that went too far and Democrat spending that went too far, is stirring talk of the need for tax increases and spending cuts. 

Some of this - tax increases on the very rich - makes perfect sense to me.
But one of the ideas getting noodled around is just plain foolish. That's the idea of junking or severely limiting, the deduction for tax purposes of interest on home mortgages. 

Look, we are just barely limping off the bottom of a residential housing catastrophe, and home buying and building are finally, after a genuine nightmare, reviving. 

If we could get housing roaring back, that would go a long way towards full recovery for our economy. 

Obviously, taking away the home mortgage interest deduction is the very last thing the housing market needs. 

I'm not saying it would hit every home buyer, but a home is an investment. If we lower the return on an investment, well, you get the picture. 

This bad idea is apparently meant to substitute for tax increases on the wealthy. 

But this is strange. The rich, by definition, are RICH. That's why they are CALLED "rich." They can afford to pay more tax. 

The middle income home buyers, or some of them, need that home mortgage interest deduction to buy. 

So we have the question: Do we want to clobber housing, hurting millions of homebuyers, builders, construction workers and timber people? Or tax the people who have two Cadillacs and a Bentley? 

How can this even be an open question? 

Observe, my friends, with what little wisdom the world is governed.

The last statement by Ben Stein is a keeper and describes the obstructionist Republicans we see today in the Congress.  A few are waking up but a lot more need to see the light and realize they are heading down a path to defeat in 2014 because of their stubbornness in refusing to work with Democrats,  The American people deserve better out of their elected representatives and the majority are disgusted with the Republicans putting Party over Country once again.

Most Congressional Republicans still don't get it as they are demanding to keep the tax cuts for the wealthy (who can afford the tax increase) while continuing their attacks on seniors, poor, and middle class taxpayers.  This time they are going after social security and medicare to help balance the budget while at the same time refusing to pass the bill in the House to make the Bush Tax cuts permanent for the middle class.  Not a way to win votes.  

Are Republicans so scared of Grover Norquist that they will go off a cliff rather then vote to raise taxes on the wealthy?  Today's GOP is pitting their wealthy donors against the middle class and poor.  IMHO it is a dumb move to tie Social Security and Medicare to tax hikes on the wealthy because those two programs are not part of the budget as President Reagan said:

 “Social Security, let’s lay it to rest once and for all… Social security has nothing to do with the deficit. Social Security is totally funded by the payroll tax levied on employer and employee. If you reduce the outgo of Social Security, that money would not go into the general fund or reduce the deficit. It would go into the Social Security Trust Fund. So Social Security has nothing to do with balancing a budget or raising or lowering the deficit.”  

It is absurd and abject stupidity to try and convince voters programs like Social Security and Medicare programs are entitlement programs when every working person pays into those programs out of every paycheck.  Look no further then Federal Civil Service who used to be exempt from Medicare and Social Security as to see the Congress spin on both of those programs as needing civil service to participate (translation = dollars) or they were going broke in ten years.  

First one to fall was Medicare in 1983 to get more money from civil service to save Medicare.  Later they split civil service into two groups in starting in 1986 -- current employees were offered a choice to stay with the regular CSRS or switch to FERS which included social security.  FERS went into effect for all new hires starting in 1986.  They gave the pitch in 80's on how much better FERS would be in the end but most long time civil service didn't buy the koolaid and kept the original CSRS.  Have yet to hear anyone who stayed in CSRS complain about the program but have heard all kinds of complaints about FERS over the years.  Then the Congress took one more step in making sure that if you retired on CSRS and worked to gain Social Security benefits that the Windfall Elimination Provision would take affect lowering your amount of Social Security benefits until you reach 30 years under Social Security.

What is it with members of Congress wanting to keep going after Social Security and Medicare like it is a giant pot of money for them in the general fund.  The money out of every paycheck goes direct to Social Security and cannot be used to fund the Government today.    

It hard for me to believe that these millionaires in Congress want to go after social security and medicare benefits to lower the deficit when they are not part of the budget.  Why not go after the fraud in medicare like Obama has proposed?  That doesn't seem to be something most GOP in Congress want to talk about.  Why?  Is it because they are beholding to their big donors who are involved in making profits from healthcare even if part of it comes from Medicare fraud?  Always thought that was the reason they fought Obamacare as well -- wealthy donors involved in healthcare.  

You are probably getting the idea that I am fed up with the current obstructionists Republicans in Congress and you would be correct.  They are an insult to anyone who has the ability to think and reason.  Perfect place for them is at the end of the unemployment line in 2014.  

Read More about the Fiscal Cliff at CBS:

• "Fiscal cliff" clock ticks, Obama hits the road

  The president heads to Michigan and will talk again about the economy and the middle-class
  December 10, 6:00 AM

• Boehner and Obama meet on "fiscal cliff"

  The two main negotiators met at the White House Sunday - their first face-to-face meeting in weeks
  December 09, 5:04 PM 

• Bowles sees "progress" on "fiscal cliff"

  Meanwhile, deficit guru Erskine Bowles' cohort Alan Simpson believes lawmakers are playing politics with the "cliff"
  December 09, 12:39 PM

• Little change in "cliff" talks, or talking points

  In their weekly addresses, President Obama and Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., don't budge from their positions regarding taxes on the wealthy
  December 08, 6:00 AM

These are only two days of headlines, but CBS has done a very good job of compiling the information leading up to the fiscal cliff at their website.    

Dick Armey's Departure from Freedom Works Turns Nasty

Koch Brothers better watch out!  Will their underhanded tactics during the election catch up with them?

Would have bet there was more to the Dick Armey leaving Freedom Works then what we were first told.  Remember this is the same Dick Armey when during the Clinton Monicagate he had this to say:

As the Los Angeles Times described the scene:

... the jam-packed room burst into raucous laughter as one reporter prefaced a question about the Lewinsky scandal by saying, "If you were in the president's position ..."  Armey didn't miss a beat.  "If I were, I would be looking up from a pool of blood and hearing my wife say, "How do I reload this thing?""

I will never forget his quote and realized that he was an honest person -- you don't find many in DC who will stand on principle.  An example is how he took after James Dobson from Focus on the Family:

Armey also feuded with Focus on the Family leader James Dobson in his later terms in office. Armey wrote, "As Majority Leader, I remember vividly a meeting with the House leadership where Dobson scolded us for having failed to 'deliver' for Christian conservatives, that we owed our majority to him, and that he had the power to take our jobs back. This offended me, and I told him so." Armey states that Focus on the Family targeted him politically after the incident, writing, "Focus on the Family deliberately perpetuates the lie that I am a consultant to the ACLU." Armey has also said that "Dobson and his gang of thieves are real nasty bullies."

Wish Armey had become Speaker as I thought he made an outstanding Majority Leader.  When he took over as head of Freedom Works, it made no sense because Armey isn't the type of guy to take orders from the Koch Brothers.  It finally got to him and the real truth came out.  It is the secrecy of the origins of cash donations to the Freedom Works PAC which he knew nothing about.  I would bet there is a lot more and if I were the Koch Brothers, I might be very concerned that he will spill everything he knows about the operation or actually report how secretive the Koch Brothers operation really is.

Now you can say I have put on my tin foil hat.  Did the Koch's hire Senator Jim DeMint who is not known as the most ethical Senator to use his clout to take on Armney for the Koch's.  Jim DeMint is a liar as we saw when he promised the Republican conference he wouldn't primary incumbents but did just that e.g. Richard Lugar.   If that is the case, I am buying tickets for that match and my money is on Dick Armey.

Mother Jones with David Corn has done an excellent job this election cycle of digging for the facts and finding them.  The election may be over but they are still digging.  Very impressive organization that make sure they have the facts even when stirring the pot.  I can just see the 'cat that swallowed the canary' look on David Corn he gets on TV as he reports on Armey's break with Freedom Works.  Looking forward to seeing more details:

Dick Armey: "This Kind of Secrecy Is Why I Left" FreedomWorks
—By David Corn| Fri Dec. 7, 2012 1:42 PM PST 

The Sunlight Foundation, a group that pushes for more transparent politics and policymaking, on Friday reported that federal records show that two mystery companies in September donated over $12 million to the super PAC of FreedomWorks, the tea party-supporting organization that this week was rocked by the abrupt resignation of its chairman, Dick Armey, the former Republican House majority leader. These contributions accounted for more than half of the $23.2 million the group raised for the 2012 campaign, and they came from two shadowy Knoxville-Tennessee-based firms—Specialty Group, Inc., and Pike Development LLC—that publicly have no reason to exist other than apparently to make contributions and mask the true source of the money. Moreover, Armey tells Mother Jones that he knew nothing about the donations or the origins of the cash and that he quit FreedomWorks partly because of a lack of transparency. 

(snip)

Mother Jones then reached Matt Kibbe, the president of FreedomWorks (whom Armey has accused of misappropriating FreedomWorks resources for his own personal benefit), and asked if it was unusual for the chairman of an outfit to be in the dark about half of the group's funding. "Well, we have 81,000 individual donors," Kibbe replied. Indeed, but only two donations that account for over $12 million. Nothing curious about Armey not being in-the-know? "It's not unusual," Kibbe said. He continued: "I don't know about these [donations]. It's the first time I've heard." 

This seemed even more bizarre. Would Kibbe not know where half of the money for his group's super PAC came from? In fact, in September, Associated Press reported:

A shadowy Tennessee company donated more than $5 million to a prominent conservative super political action committee days after establishing itself…Campaign finance reports filed late Thursday show that the political committee, FreedomWorks for America, received seven donations totaling $5.28 million from Knoxville-based Specialty Group Inc. The money, which accounted for about 90 percent of FreedomWorks for America's donations during the first 15 days of October, is helping pay for TV ads supporting conservative candidates for federal office.

That money helped underwrite a massive $1.5 million television ad buy targeting Democrat Tammy Duckworth who was challenging Rep. Joe Walsh (R-Ill.), a leading tea partier. At the time, a FreedomWorks spokesman declined to comment, and the registered owner of Specialty Group, William S. Rose, stayed mum, as well. (The money didn't help; Duckworth won the race.) 

When asked how he could not be aware of these hefty donations, Kibbe requested that he be sent the Sunlight Foundation article and said, "I'm not supposed to comment before reading."
Armey's bad-blood departure from FreedomWorks—which yielded him an $8 million payout—has created a bigtime dustup. And the group's big secrets may well be in jeopardy.

Source:  David Corn at Mother Jones  

A New Low for Senate Republicans: Mitch McConnell Filibusters his Own Bill to lift the Debt Ceiling

You want to know what is wrong with Senate Republicans -- look no further then the Minority Leader Mitch McConnell who had a first in the Senate -- filibustering his own bill.  You cannot make this up for the abject stupidity we are seeing out of the Republicans in Congress.

Maybe a certain large aerospace company who made rumored deal with McConnell in KY should be worried that he may not survive  the election in 2014 as Kentucky wants better representation.  If he loses in 2014, will that same company start losing sole source contracts and have to compete?  Who pulled McConnell's chain on this one for him to make himself look like an idiot?  Looks like he did it to himself with misjudging Majority Leader Reid and the Democrats.  Is Ashley Judd thinking about running for Senate getting to McConnell?

In fact there are a lot of Senate questions this week swirling around after Sen DeMint (R-SC), the defacto head of the Senate Tea Party who kept some members in line, announced his resignation on December 31st to take over the Heritage Foundation.  He may make more money but prestige wise -- no way.  Maybe he can do to the Koch Brother's Heritage Foundation what he did in Senate races by supporting some hard left conservatives in the primary who lost in the general.  Heritage was already hard right so how much further right can they go?  We are about to find out.

Then we have Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) now declaring the earth is 4.5 billion years old not under 10,000 years which he said a a few short days ago.  Guess he is no longer pandering to the hard right evangelicals. If that wasn't enough this week, along comes the author of the Ryan Budget that devastated senior citizens with Paul Ryan's speech at the Kemp dinner about we as Republicans respect everyone.  I guess that goes for women who were raped?  Has he quit defining rape at least for now?  Rhetoric has changed but has the basic philosophy of those two?  I doubt it especially from Ryan.  I was shocked when Rubio went hard right and became attached to DeMint as part of the hard right of the Senate.  Is he now going to move back to center right where he gave speeches on American Exceptionalism.

McConnell with filibustering his own bill which has never happened in the Senate has now topped my list for Stupidity of the Week -- trust me -- he had a lot of competition after the GOP Senate defeated the Disabilities Treaty and he could still be ousted as there are a few more days in the week.  It seems McConnell thought the Democrats didn't have the vote to pass his bill weakening the Congressional power on the debt ceiling so he called their bluff and he ended up on the short end of the stick

Can only imagine the look on Majority Leader Reid's face when he made this announcement:

“The Republican leader objects to his own idea,” Reid declared on the floor. “So I guess we have a filibuster of his own bill.”

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) scoffed at that notion that a senator would ask for a vote on a bill in good faith while requiring that it be “filibuster-proof.” 

“This may be a moment in Senate history, when a senator made a proposal that, when given an opportunity for a vote on that proposal, filibustered his own proposal,” he said. “I don’t think this has ever happened before.” 

Don't think I could have kept a straight face when announcing a Senator especially the Republican leader was going to filibuster his own bill:

McConnell Filibusters His Own Bill To Lift Debt Ceiling
Sahil Kapur December 6, 2012, 2:20 PM  

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) wanted to prove on Thursday that Democrats don’t have the votes to weaken Congress’ authority on the debt limit. Instead they called his bluff, and he ended up filibustering his own bill. 

The legislation, modeled on a proposal McConnell offered last year as a “last-choice option” to avert a U.S. debt default, would permit the president to unilaterally lift the debt ceiling unless Congress mustered a two-thirds majority to stop him. 

McConnell brought up the legislation Thursday morning. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) initially objected, seemingly proving the Republican leader’s point that it cannot pass the Senate. But then Reid ran it by his members and, in the afternoon, agreed to hold that same vote. This time it was McConnell who objected. 

 Excerpt:  Read More at Talking Points Memo

How can voters take the Congress seriously after things like this?  We are certainly not getting our monies worth as taxpayers from the current Congress.  Time to cut their salaries, their staffs and their benefits until we see progress being made on what is best for the American people not just the wealthy!

Senator Coburn Backs Tax Rate Hike on Wealthy

Can see the gnashing of teeth by Sen DeMint and the rest of the Tea Party Senators at Dr. Coburn.  This cracked me up because once again Dr. Coburn is showing that he is his own man and not beholding to any group.  How are House Tea Party conservatives going to spin this one.  Let's see -- Coburn is really a RINO not a conservative, Coburn is traitor to the Tea Party, Coburn is a moderate and the list will go on and on with his support of tax rate hikes on the Wealthy.

Completely agree this is the only way to raise the necessary funds and then negotiate broader reforms to the Tax Code.  Interesting times we live in today!

5 December 2012
1 hour agoGOP senator backs tax rate hike on wealthyPosted by
CNN's Dana Bash and Ted Barrett 

Washington (CNN) - In a significant development in the fiscal cliff standoff, Republican Sen. Tom Coburn, a leading deficit hawk, said Wednesday he would support higher tax rates on wealthier Americans as part of a broader deal with President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats to avoid the crisis. 

"I know we have to raise revenue," the senator from Oklahoma told MSNBC. "I don't really care which way we do it. Actually, I would rather see rates go up than do it the other way, because it gives us a greater chance to reform the tax code and broaden the base in the future."

Coburn, who served on the Simpson-Bowles fiscal commission and participated in the Gang of Six deficit talks, was one of the first Republicans a couple of years to embrace raising revenue to reduce the deficit. At that time, he wanted to do it through reforming the tax code by eliminating loopholes and deductions that he argued favored the rich and powerful. But now he appears to be the first GOP senator to say publicly he would back increasing the tax rates on the wealthy, as long as that increase is coupled with spending cuts and entitlement reforms. 

Coburn thinks its better to raise rates now, which will generate the money needed to get beyond the fiscal cliff and then negotiate broad reforms to the tax code – such as eliminating deductions and loopholes – that both Republicans and Democrats argue is necessary. 

He is worried that if some reforms are made now as part of the fiscal cliff talks, Congress might never return to the table to do comprehensive reform. 

Not surprisingly, Democrats seized on Coburn's unexpected new position.  Excerpt:  Read More at CNN

Treaty to Protect Disabled Around the World gets Rejected by 38 GOP Senators

There are some Republicans in the Senate once again who are proving how out of touch they are with the majority of the American people. When you have two long-time veterans former President George H W Bush and former Senator Bob Dole pushing this treaty, hard headed, obstinate Senate Republicans rose to the occasion to block the treaty with 38 voting no.  The United Nations has been around since 1945 and we are still hearing they want to take over the United States.  Note to Republican Leadership:  That rhetoric doesn't fly anymore with most US citizens, but it works wonders with the hard right who repeat your rhetoric.

Senators McCain, Barraso, and Brown, Lugar along with all the Republican women in the Senate, Ayotte, Collins, Murkowski, and Snowe voted yes standing up for the rights of the disabled.  Would more Senators have voted yes if a Republican was in the White House when this treaty was signed?  That seems to be the problem with a lot of GOP Senators and members of the House -- they don't control the White House so they don't want to play ball.  Shocked Boehner didn't weigh in like he did on the new rules for filibuster for the Senate.

Hard right may have scored another victory, but the Country loses which they don't seem to care about as long as they get their way.  It is going to catch up with them as more and more Republicans who are center right are waking up to the fact the GOP has gone hard Libertarian right.  Don't even agree with those people 80% or 50% of the time.

Senate rejects treaty to protect disabled around the worldBy Rosalind S. Helderman,
Dec 04, 2012 05:47 PM ESTThe Washington Post Updated: Tuesday, December 4, 11:47 AM 

The Senate has failed to ratify an international treaty intended to protect the rights of those with disabilities, as a bloc of conservatives opposed the treaty believing it could interfere with U.S. law. 

The Senate voted 61 to 38 to ratify the Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities, a tally that fell short of the two-thirds needed to sign on to an international treaty. 

The 2006 treaty, which forbids discrimination of the disabled, has enjoyed bipartisan support. Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said the treaty would encourage other nations to develop the kind of protections the United States adopted 22 years ago with the Americans With Disabilities Act. The international treaty’s thrust, he said, was a message: “Be more like us.” 

But the treaty has split Republicans. Among its most vocal supporters were Republican war veterans, including President George H.W. Bush and former senator Bob Dole, who was injured in World War II and made a rare return to the Senate floor Tuesday to observe the vote and lend his stature. 

Other conservatives were deeply suspicious of the United Nations, which would oversee treaty obligations. Those who opposed the treaty included former senator and Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum, the father of a developmentally disabled child who had traveled to Capitol Hill last week to encourage fellow Republicans to vote no. 

He and other conservatives argued that the treaty could relinquish U.S. sovereignty to a U.N. committee charged with overseeing a ban on discrimination and determining how the disabled, including children, should be treated. They particularly worried that the committee could violate the rights of parents who choose to home school their disabled children. 

Read More at the Washington Post 

Who voted NO?

The usual suspects mostly from red states:

NAYs ---38
Alexander (R-TN) Blunt (R-MO) Boozman (R-AR) Burr (R-NC) Chambliss (R-GA) Coats (R-IN) Coburn (R-OK) Cochran (R-MS) Corker (R-TN) Cornyn (R-TX) Crapo (R-ID) DeMint (R-SC) Enzi (R-WY)	Graham (R-SC) Grassley (R-IA) Hatch (R-UT) Heller (R-NV) Hoeven (R-ND) Hutchison (R-TX) Inhofe (R-OK) Isakson (R-GA) Johanns (R-NE) Johnson (R-WI) Kyl (R-AZ) Lee (R-UT) McConnell (R-KY)	Moran (R-KS) Paul (R-KY) Portman (R-OH) Risch (R-ID) Roberts (R-KS) Rubio (R-FL) Sessions (R-AL) Shelby (R-AL) Thune (R-SD) Toomey (R-PA) Vitter (R-LA) Wicker (R-MS)

Paul Krugman: Republican's Operation "Rolling Tantrum"

Don't know when I have seen a title that describes Speaker John Boehner and the House Republicans better than "Operation Rolling Tantrum."  Last week, Boehner sent out the GOP Whip, Tom Cole (R-OK), to push for the House to pass the Bush Tax Cuts for those making less than $250,000.  Being the skeptic I am, I told some good friends that I thought this was a set-up as Cole was not going to break with leadership.  Lo and behold the truth came out yesterday:

"I don't think we need to put a formal proposal out on the table," Cole said on ABC's "This Week." "Speaker [John Boehner] has already said revenue is on the table. He has got an idea about how to get there in terms of not raises rates, but finding it in other ways through tax code reform. I think that makes a lot of sense, and that's a doable thing, but beyond that, you know, we'll wait and see how the negotiations go." 

Cole also bashed the plan Geithner brought to congressional leaders this week. "I want to thank the president and Tim Geithner for re-uniting and re-energizing the Republican caucus," he said. "Because that offer -- they must think John Boehner is Santa Claus, because that is a Christmas wish list, not a real proposal." 

The demeaning attitude of Cole and House Republicans toward the President and Treasury Secretary Geithner shows that the GOP did not learn one lesson from the November election -- they are as arrogant as ever.

While Republicans continue to promote the wealthy, the 3rd quarter has shown that Corporate Profits Hit Record High While Worker Wages Hit Record Low.  Yet we are supposed to want the wealthy to keep the Bush Tax Cuts which have all the loopholes for them including hedge fund managers?  The American people spoke in the recent Presidential election but seems Republicans in Congress have cotton balls in their ears as they didn't get the message.  

This article by Paul Krugman is classic on the tantrums being thrown by Republicans will probably continue until 2014 when the voters have a chance to send them to the unemployment line even in heavily gerrymandered districts and with voter suppression by the Republicans.  American people are fed up with the obstructionist tactics of Republicans.  It is not the Democrats this group of arrogant Republicans have to fear, it is Republicans like me who have had it with their obstructionist tactics, lies, and elitism.  

December 2, 2012, 4:01 pm 

Operation Rolling Tantrum

Paul Krugman, New York Times  

Oh, boy. This isn’t going to end, even when or if a deal is reached on defusing the austerity bomb; John Boehner has just declared that he’s going to hold the full faith and credit of the United States hostage every time we hit the debt limit. Nor will it be a case of holding the nation at gunpoint until it meets GOP demands; Republicans are signaling that they don’t intend to make any specific proposals, they’re just going to yell and stamp their feet until Obama soothes them somehow. 

So this is going to be nightmarish, unless Obama surrenders — which I don’t think he will (because he shouldn’t). 

And one thing to think about: if the next two years are, as they seem likely to be, one long Republican tantrum, the 2014 election is not going to be a normal midterm. It will instead be a referendum on GOP obstructionism, which may attract a lot more attention — and much higher turnout — than normal. 

When the facts come out, McConnell is still the arrogant, underhanded Republican leader in the Senate.  Any Senator whose wife serves in the cabinet like his wife did for Bush is not someone I would trust.  Personally think that should be against the rules but even then it probably would have happened as this group of Republicans in leadership do not believe rules apply to them.

Rumor has McConnell offering a major aerospace company a safe haven from sequestering if they continue to build up their presence in Kentucky.  How many sole source contracts is McConnell going to promise to the same company in exchange for bringing business to Kentucky?  Inquiring minds want to know what the deal was to move company resources to Lexington which make no sense.  If McConnell said the sky was blue it would pay to go check.

December 2, 2012, 10:02 am 

The Full McConnell  

Paul Krugman, New York Times

In his interview with the Wall Street Journal, Mitch McConnell finally mentioned a few sort-of specifics about what spending cuts the GOP wants: raising the Medicare age, charging higher premiums to affluent Medicare recipients, and changing the price indexing of Social Security. But how much does all this amount to?

I’ve already noted that the CBO has estimated the fiscal savings from raising the Medicare age at $113 billion over the next decade. A study of health care options (pdf) from a few years ago put the savings from expanded premiums at $20 billion (Option 91) – that number would be somewhat higher now, but still small.

I haven’t found a 10-year estimate of the Social Security indexing idea, but we can roll our own. The idea is to replace the CPI with a “chained” measure that typically rises about 0.3 percentage points less per year. Apply this to the CBO projections of Social Security spending under current policy and I get 10-year savings of $186 billion. 

So, if we take all of McConnell’s ideas together, we get a bit more than $300 billion. Getting this would, by the way, impose substantial hardship – seniors would be forced into inferior private insurance, and there are good reasons to believe that the true inflation rate facing seniors is actually higher, not lower, than the CPI. Still, what we’re looking at overall is a saving equal to only about one-fifth of what Obama is proposing to raise by higher taxes. 

And that’s it; has anyone heard even a peep from the GOP about what else they’d like to cut?
This is pathetic – and these people are definitely not serious.

Republican lies are catching up with them.  Paul Krugman schools Republicans on the facts:

December 1, 2012, 5:37 pm  

What Defines A Serious Deficit Proposal?  

Paul Krugman, NY Times

Just a thought: if you follow the pundit discussion of matters fiscal, you get the definite impression that some kinds of deficit reduction are considered “serious”, while others are not. 

In particular, the Obama administration’s call for higher revenue through increased taxes on high incomes — which actually goes considerably beyond just letting the Bush tax cuts for the top end expire — gets treated with an unmistakable sneer in much political discussion, as if it were a trivial thing, more about staking out a populist position than it is about getting real on red ink. 

On the other hand, the idea of raising the age of Medicare eligibility gets very respectful treatment — now that’s serious.So I thought I’d look at the dollars and cents — and even I am somewhat shocked. Those tax hikes would raise $1.6 trillion over the next decade; according to the CBO, raising the Medicare age would save $113 billion in federal funds over the next decade. 

So, the non-serious proposal would reduce the deficit 14 times as much as the serious proposal.I guess we have to understand the definition of serious: a proposal is only serious if it punishes the poor and the middle class.

When I saw this article this morning, I burst out laughing.  I have discovered that I am agreeing with Krugman more and more as Republicans and their economists aka lobbyists have gone hard left libertarian with their ideas in order to protect their wealthy donors while ignoring the middle class and poor.

Paul Krugman: GOP Fiscal Cliff Offer 'Pathetic' 

The Huffington Post  |  By Alana Horowitz 

Posted: 12/02/2012 11:08 am EST Updated: 12/02/2012 12:22 pm EST 

Paul Krugman offered a harsh analysis of the Republican plan to deal with the "fiscal cliff."
"This is pathetic – and these people are definitely not serious," he wrote on Sunday.According to Krugman, specifics offered by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell just aren't enough to balance the budget. They also put seniors at risk, he said. 

"What we’re looking at overall is a saving equal to only about one-fifth of what Obama is proposing to raise by higher taxes," he wrote. 

McConnell told the Wall Street Journal on Friday that Republicans are seeking to raise to the Medicare age and modify Social Security. In return, they'd agree to an increase in tax revenue-- but not from higher tax rates. 

Republicans and Democrats are at odds over how to address the fiscal cliff. President Obama has repeatedly pushed for higher taxes on the rich. However, House Speaker John Boehner told 'Fox News Sunday' that negotiations are going "nowhere." Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told NBC's 'Meet The Press' that he expects Republicans to eventually agree to tax increases. 

"The ball really is with them now," Geithner said.

Here are the ten people most responsible for this so-called 'fiscal cliff' -- love the fact that Nutting from Market Watch went after both parties.  He is bi-partisan in criticism but reserves the most blame for Republicans which is where it should be.  He shows this all started with the Clinton years of excess money and the Bush years of tax cuts.  Obama was left to clean up the mess and as he will admit, he could have done a better job.

Today Obama seems to understand what he is doing and will not be snowed again by Congress like he was in 2011.  Most Republicans in the Congress do not have the best interests of the Country in mind but instead what will benefit their huge donors.  Read the details on these people and then understand that greed is a powerful driving factor to where we are today as the wealthy have gotten richer with the Bush Tax Cuts and the Middle Class have taken a real hit with less spending power:

10 people who led us to the ‘fiscal cliff’ 

By Rex Nutting, MarketWatch
November 21, 2012 

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — With our political leaders locked in a fiscal struggle that threatens to throw the economy off a so-called cliff and into recession, you might be wondering how we got to this place. 

Remember that this supposed fiscal cliff is the direct result of two contradictory impulses in American life: Greed and guilt. Greed for low taxes, a strong military, a strong safety net and lots of government spending for everyone. And guilt that we weren’t paying our way. Read “Stop calling it a ‘fiscal cliff’” 

Arthur Laffer.  Laffer was the economist who proved the existence of the free lunch. His Laffer Curve showed, in theory, that cutting tax rates would actually increase tax revenue. He gave intellectual cover to those conservatives who wanted to cut taxes but who didn’t want to be seen as contributing to a big deficit. He gave them a guilt-free way to cut revenue.

There’s only one problem: Laffer’s ideas didn’t pan out in practice: Tax cuts don’t pay for themselves. Tax cuts are a major cause of our $16 trillion national debt.

Pete Peterson.  If there’s one person who we can blame for making us feel guilty about the federal deficit, it’s Peterson, a hedge-fund billionaire who was a cabinet secretary in the Reagan administration. Peterson founded, funded or supported most of the institutions in Washington devoted to publicizing the problem of the deficit, including the Concord Coalition, the Peterson Foundation, The Fiscal Times, and the anti-deficit documentary “I.O.U.S.A.”

Without Peterson’s billions and the guilt it bought, the deficit would be a fringe issue.

Bill Clinton. President Clinton made budget surpluses look easy. The budget was in the black the last four years of his administration. What’s worse, he made surpluses look like a sure thing. 

Clinton’s surpluses were partly the result of Washington going on a serious budget diet, with higher taxes paired with moderation in spending. But it was the booming economy — and higher taxes on capital income — that turned the modest deficits of the early Clinton years into surpluses. 

By the time Clinton left office, politicians were beginning to talk about perpetual surpluses, in exactly the same way that hucksters on Wall Street were talking about a perpetual bull market. And with exactly the same outcome. 

Alan Greenspan. Greenspan was a high priest of both guilt and greed. He had always warned Congress about the dangers of the deficits, but his biggest failure as Federal Reserve chairman was the day in 2001 he told Congress that the worst thing it could do was pay down the debt because that would destroy the Treasury market and the Fed’s power to control the economy. 

That was the day he endorsed the Bush tax cuts. The Maestro’s endorsement gave intellectual cover to the conservatives who wanted to cut taxes, but who didn’t want to feel guilty. 

Greenspan also catered to our greedy side as a serial bubble-blower. He inflated the housing bubble in the 2000s by keeping interest rates low and by refusing to regulate the shadow banking system. 

George W. Bush . No one is more responsible for racking up our debt than Bush. He campaigned in 2000 promising to cut taxes in order to avoid paying down the national debt. And when the recession of 2001 arrived, he said tax cuts would revive the economy. And when the economy didn’t revive, he cut taxes some more. Tax cuts for all occasions. And it was all guilt-free. 

Dick Cheney. While Bush was busy cutting taxes, Cheney was busy planning the war on terror. For the first time in our history, we sent our military into battle without raising taxes at home to help pay for it. It added trillions to the debt. 

David Lereah. Lereah was the chief economist for the National Association of Realtors and was perhaps the most enthusiastic and public cheerleader for the housing bubble. Even after the bubble began to deflate, Lereah still insisted that real-estate investments would never lose money. 

Of course, Lereah didn’t cause the bubble all by himself, but he does embody the greed that engulfed the real estate industry, the Wall Street banks that profited from it, and the homeowners who took on more debt than they could ever hope to repay. 

The housing and credit bubble led to the collapse of the financial system in 2008 and was the direct cause of the Great Recession and the ensuing $1 trillion-a-year deficits. 

Grover Norquist. As the head of a powerful lobbying and campaign-finance organization, Norquist forced almost every Republican officeholder to sign a pledge to never raise taxes under any circumstance. If anyone declined to sign or dared to violate the pledge, Norquist would back a primary challenger. The threat worked. 

The Norquist pledge blocked any possibility of a budget deal between Democrats and Republicans over the past two years. Democrats insisted that any plan to balance the budget must include more revenue as well as spending cuts, but Republicans held solid against any tax increase. 

There are signs that Norquist could be losing his hold on the party. Several Republicans won elections this year without signing his pledge, and several incumbents have said they don’t feel bound by the pledge any more. 

Barack Obama. Obama may be the perfect representative of our age, because he encapsulates our national schizophrenia over the budget. He honors both the greed and the guilt. He presided over the largest deficits in history, including a large fiscal stimulus, bailouts of the auto industry, and an expansion of the safety net. 

But Obama also lectures us about the need for the government to tighten its belt, even during a recession. He wants to raise taxes, if only on a few, and he’s expressed willingness to cut into the great middle-class entitlements. It was Obama’s administration that first suggested the bargain in 2011 that created the fiscal cliff. 

John Boehner. The House speaker is trapped in Grover Norquist’s world. He’s a pragmatic legislator who accepts that the government needs more revenue, but his caucus in the House doesn’t agree. In the summer of 2011, Boehner nearly forced the nation to default on its debt because he couldn’t deliver the votes necessary to raise taxes. 

In the end, Boehner was forced to punt the problem down the road. Today’s fiscal cliff showdown is the result of Boehner’s inability to lead the House Republicans to a deal. 

Read more on the Fiscal Cliff at Market Watch 

Time for the American people to rise up with one voice and tell today's Republican Party to quit obstructing and put the American people first over their big donors.  This is the most disgusting group of  Republicans I have seen in Congress.  They are in the hip pockets of the wealthy donors and lobbyists.  How many Congressional Republicans have benefited from the deep pockets of these donors and lobbyists?  It is the only explanation on how they can come to DC as middle to upper middle class and now are multi-millionaires.  What is an insult to my intelligence that they only have to disclose a range of what they are worth?  If we demand to see the income tax returns of our Presidential candidates, why not our members of Congress?

Now would be a good time for an investigative journalist to look into how members of Congress made their millions while saying they were serving the American people.  All I know is that $1 today does not goes as far as it used to in the past.  The cost of almost everything has continued to rise with corporate executives getting richer while the workers get little to no pay increases but the price for what we buy is continuing to go up.  Greed has overtaken Corporate America and some members of Congress.  When a member of Congress retires or is voted out of office, they should not be allowed to be lobbyists.  A member of Congress should also not have his wife as a member of the President's cabinet like Sen McConnell's wife was in the Bush Administration.

Reform is needed from Campaign Finance Reform to reign in secret donations and multi-millionairs/billionairs trying to buy elections to the way members of Congress are paid including benefits to the huge increase in the number of staff in the Congress and last but not least, forbid lobbyists from writing the bills that members submit.  Time for Congress to take the first action and show they are serious about the deficit by cutting their own Houses first starting with their salaries (no raises), their staffs, and benefits.

Remember what is happening right now in Congress by obstructionist Republicans -- start getting involved now in the 2014 electiona to send a message that the American people will not put up with obstructionists tactics and whichever party is in power must work for the American people.  The way this group of Republicans has been acting in Congress, the Democrats deserve to take back the House and see if they can be more responsible.  If they can't, then the American people will vote them out again.   The grandstanding has to stop!  The very idea that McCain, Graham, and Ayotte along with others run out to a microphone to spew their lies has to stop.  The American people deserve better representation then what we have in Congress today.   Time to vote out obstructionists in 2014!