Obama Acted too Soon on Tax Framework

I've listened to a variety of commentary on Obama's Tax Cut ransom "Framework" with the hostage takers (AKA Republicans).

What stands out for me is the Rachel Maddow show of 12/7/10 with Simon Johnson and Senator Sherrod Brown (D) OH. Three things stand out in particular: 1) People falling for Obama's rhetoric and concluding "he did the right thing under the circumstances", 2) Obama's list of what the Republicans supposedly "gave up" in this deal, like Childcare Tax Credits, College Tuition Tax Credits. But these were tax cuts added to Obama's earlier stimulus package to presumably attract Republican vote (in other words, the Reeps didn't "give these up") , and 3) Sherrod Brown's convincing scenario of the "fighting" path Democrats could have taken if the White House had coordinated a strategy with the Hill; a messaging campaign, taking the Reeps to the brink and making them blink at the 11th hour. He's convinced that the extension of unemployment benefits would have passed... without all of the other capitulations, like changes to inheritance taxes that will further polarize wealth in our Country.

I think Hugo Chavez was right: Obama is a prisoner. Even if Sherrod Brown's scenario didn't play out, at the 11.5th hour they could have caved... but they didn't really fight for it.

I know some say that the Reeps also held other legislation hostage until they ransomed the tax cuts for the rich, like "don't ask," but if the Dems want to frame and control the message, then they need to let the Reeps dangle in the breeze before paying the hostage ransom.

• Contact the US Senate
• Contact the House of Representatives

Sources:

Preserve Right to Criminal Prosecution of Bush

For the next three weeks the blog takes to the road. Last time I did this I was exposed to the NYC Mentality.

OK. So there's a debate about the wisdom of impeaching Bush. I side with those who say Impeach Bush and Cheney to set the record straight for history, and to deter future Presidents from abusing power.

Despite Pelosi's "off-the-table" proclamation, the impeachment process is happening; that's because it is an organic process that unravels on it's own, just like the GOP support for the Iraq war is unraveling.

Politics is the art of the possible. The US House of Representatives should impeach Bush and Cheney with an explicit provision that the Senate need not act on the impeachment. This would avoid the question of double-jeopardy, thereby preserving the right to criminally prosecute Bush for capital offenses (See Update).

This is a win-win compromise for the progressive camps on both sides of the impeachment debate. It addresses the concerns of people like Senator Sherrod Brown who think Rove and others will exploit the situation by having the press say, "Give Democrats power, and see what they do with it? Spend time on vindictive acts rather than solving problems of the people."

The talk needs to turn to criminal prosecution of Bush Administration officials. Once we get Bush over the barrel, with capital punishment in play, then we can start talking about a grand compromise that will redistribute some of our stolen wealth.

Sherrod Brown to Switch Vote on Military Commissions Act

From the DownWithTyranny! blog:

As you might know, Senator Sherrod Brown voted for the Military Commissions Act. He has now admitted it was a mistake and will switch his vote.

From Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks. Cenk interviewed Brown today (June 18, 2007) and Brown admitted he had made a serious mistake:

Cenk Uygur: Thanks for joining us Senator. We
appreciate it. I gotta start off with the question
we've had now for over six months, I gotta ask you,
why did you vote for the Military Commissions Act?

Senator Brown: It was a bad vote. I shouldn't have.

Cenk Uygur: Oh, wow. Okay.

Senator Brown: A vote I'll correct ... when it comes.

Cenk Uygur: So, you regret that?

Senator Brown: I take responsibility. It was the heat
of the campaign and I made a mistake.

Cenk Uygur: So, if it comes again you're going to
change the vote?

Senator Brown: You bet.

Sharrod, Sherud, Sherrud, Sharrad, Sherrad

Connie Schultz: HIs Lovely Wife

Thanks to Robert McChesney, and Media Matters June 17th episode, I'm now familiar with Senator Sherrod Brown's Lovely Wife, the articulate, pulitzer prize winning journalist Connie Schultz. I strongly encourage people listen to that show, particularly those who miss Molly Ivins.

Connie Schultz is a columnist with the Cleveland Plain Dealer. Her column is now carried by Creators Syndicate, which still lists Molly Ivins as a writer. She won the 2005 Pulitzer prize for commentary written in 2004. The Pulitzer citation stated the award was for

her pungent columns that provided a voice for the underdog and underprivileged.

Of course, she's just the lovely wife of newly elected, truly progressive and not-afraid-to-speak-his-mind US Senator Sherrod Brown. In 2004, I was pulling for outspoken Iraq war veteran Paul Hackett, before the Democratic machine hammered him, and put in this guy named "Sherrod Brown" as the US Senate candidate. I was pleasantly surprised to discover that Brown/Schultz are the real deal. Brown voted against the Iraq war, Brown truly deferred to his wife Connie before entering their race. His belief in himself and honesty to the progressive values persuaded Connie that the sacrifices would be worth it, even if he was a long shot.

And they are in love. I know that sounds a little silly, but listening to her interview with Bob McChesney revealed the power of true love. In other words, a little advice to right-wing hit men; don't piss these two people off... they're in love and that's a force you don't want to mess with. Seriously.

As revealed in her interview with McChesney, Schultz is a clear thinker. This is critical to ensure informative, concise writing. She also has a firm moral compass and stands by her principles. When you listen to her, you can't help but think, "her parents must have been solid people."

She demonstrates this with an anecdotal story. Connie was at an event in which someone introduced her as Sherrod Brown's wife, saying she's one of those women who won't change her name. Her father had just recently died at age 69. She got up to speak and explained her pride in being a Schultz. She was raised by extremely hard working parents from Appalachia who never went to college, who gave up a lot so their children could be somebody. You can be certain there's a man out there who had a rapid conversion in his views on women keeping their maiden name after marriage.

That's where I'll end it. You can have some hope in the future, because Sharrod and Connie are out there slogging away for truth, justice and the American way. Of course,they can't do it without us.

Aside: This blog entry got a slow start... it once looked like this:

I confess that this is a draft blog entry, because while I was writing it I bacame side-tracked on finding a widget for making a slide show that would make Sherrod Brown look like he was clapping. Unfortunately, the clapping slide show doesn't seem to work, and I've yet to do justice to Brown's lovely wife.... but I'm work'n on it.

... if you want him to clap faster, click the [-] minus sign... still trying to figure out how to default to 1 sec....