—
In a recent YouGov survey, 43 percent of respondents under age 30 said they had a favorable opinion of socialism, while just 32 percent said the same about capitalism. Among all ages, races, geographic regions, genders, party affiliations and income levels, millennials were the only demographic that held socialism in higher regard than capitalism.
It’s not just Sanders’s socialist label that sells; it’s his socialist ideas, too.
—
And in 20 years, when the majority of the voting generations have grown up with “socialists” like Obama, instead on Stalin, you’ll be able to win a national election proudly bearing that label.
Until that time, it’s just not going to fly in a national election.
Ya know…there’s a quick and easy conventional wisdom on the Presidential campaign of one Bernard Sanders, and it’s simply this….there’s no way a socialist can win a national election.
Oh, that’s also proceeded by, “I love the guy, don’t disagree with much he does, he’s honest, and does what he says he does.”
Also, he was born in 1941 and will have *just turned* 75 in the months leading up to the 2016 election.
We actually have a socialist running for President of the United States. A real one. A “self-avowed” one, if you will.
This is going to have a number of interesting effects. First and foremost, in the primary season…folks are going to get to see *WHAT AN ACTUAL UNAPOLOGETIC SOCIALIST* sounds like.
And it’s going to be a crotchety, 75-year old man that thinks the system is unfair to young people and workers.
And knows how that system works.
It’s not going to be scary. It’s not going to be Stalin. Socialism, through the curious lens of American culture, is going to be cool again.
This will likely go down as (another) of the great mistakes of the GOP. You see, having cast *Obama* as a socialist, the GOP has already broken that ice. The latest 3 generations of Americans weren’t as programmed as the Boomers (and above) to hate the very notion of the sound of the word of “socialism”, so they see *and feel* the term much differently.
Particularly those who have spent their sentient years under the rule of a “socialist dictator” as so many on the right think of Obama (I’m not joking, this is a common comment on the President).
To see *an actual* socialist in campaign mode will no doubt be good for the country, as we get a chance to re-engage a term that is not actually political poison in the rest of the world, but simply a general term for a system of government that trends opposite of our current oligarchy, for better or worse as such trends dictate*
Do I think Sanders can win the upset campaign? I’m not so sure, if only because he’s waited so long to really start.
Going on the Sunday shows was not the strategy to lay the groundwork for a successful Presidential campaign at 75. Doing it at 63, and 67, and 71 was, as RON PAUL did for his own “ism” of the liberte variety.
I’m looking forward to seeing how Sanders fairs with the grueling pace of the campaign, and how he looks under the lights and the contrast he allows for Clinton. Where and how they disagree will be useful, if only as a lesson as to what words mean.
Like “socialism”, which we are about to get a solid dose of, one way or another.
* to be clear, I think income/wealth inequality is our biggest societal challenge, about to be made *MUCH WORSE* by automation, and as such, a healthy dose of socialism is exactly what we need to prevent (or merely push back) societal collapse.**
**. I say with my usual comic over/understatement.
This’ll be a a Quick backwards looking post at Election 2010. Now that we are a few weeks out, we’ve got a bit more perspective on what happened (and why). I find it is generally useful to look back, after things are all said and done, in order to further refine one’s ability to look forward. Since we know what we thought would happen and we know what happened, it’s time to re-calibrate.
And we’re off…
1) Speaking of “off” here’s Rasmussen.
Every election cycle has its winners and losers: not just the among the candidates, but also the pollsters.
On Tuesday, polls conducted by the firm Rasmussen Reports — which released more than 100 surveys in the final three weeks of the campaign, including some commissioned under a subsidiary on behalf of Fox News — badly missed the margin in many states, and also exhibited a considerable bias toward Republican candidates.
—
The 105 polls released in Senate and gubernatorial races by Rasmussen Reports and its subsidiary, Pulse Opinion Research, missed the final margin between the candidates by 5.8 points, a considerably higher figure than that achieved by most other pollsters. Some 13 of its polls missed by 10 or more points
—
Moreover, Rasmussen’s polls were quite biased, overestimating the standing of the Republican candidate by almost 4 points on average.
Hardly a day goes by that I don’t hear about a Rasmussen opinion poll somewhere. If their real polls, the one where they make their bacon, where so far off, how bad do you think their “Do you like the President?” poll is?
A new analysis of 2010 election polling found that surveys that relied only on landline telephone users were more skewed toward Republicans, as opposed to polls that also included cell-phone users.
According to the Pew Research Center, polls that included landlines gave Republicans a roughly 6-point boost compared with polls that included both landline and mobile phones. According to Pew, its landline-only surveys found the GOP with a 12-point lead in House races ahead of Election Day. But when cell-phone users were included, the Republican lead dropped to just 6 points — a result much closer to what actually happened on election night.
We’ve discussed before (and will again shortly) how the U.S. Election of 2010 was dominated by old people, one can also see how this tends to skews the land-line polls. I haven’t had a landline in many, many years, and I doubt a sizeable percentage of people younger than me will ever have an official one. While this is generally just a thing, for the polling world, it has had predicted results now show up in hindsight.
Speaking of old-people, hindsight, the Tea Party and Election 2010, (see what I did there?), here’s a summary picture of the electorate’s attitude…
And here’s the poll summary data illustrating the same point.
According to an Associated Press-GfK Poll this month, 84 percent who call themselves tea party supporters don’t like how President Barack Obama is handling his job — a view shared by just 35 percent of all other adults.
—
Tea partiers are about four times likelier than others to back repealing Obama’s health care overhaul and twice as likely to favor renewing tax cuts for the highest-earning Americans.
—
Tea party backers were about five times likelier to blame Obama for the country’s economic ills, three times likelier to say Obama’s policies will be harmful and twice as apt to see the country on the wrong track.
—
These aren’t subtle shadings between tea party backers and the majority of Americans, who don’t support the movement; they’re Grand Canyon-size chasms.
—
Tea partiers are likelier to be white, male, older and more affluent than everyone else, the polls show — groups that tend to be more conservative. Yet even compared with the 47 percent of conservatives who don’t back the tea party, the views of conservatives who do support the movement stand out.
—
Among conservatives who are tea party backers, 74 percent are glad Republicans will run the House next year while Democrats retain control of the Senate and White House. Just 36 percent of conservatives who don’t back the tea party agree that divided government will be good for the country, likely because of concern over gridlock. [see the special note on why this level of partisan hatred is bad thing]
—
Tea party backers are also far likelier than other conservatives to like Palin, the former Alaska governor.
For those in need of another picture summary of who the Tea Party is, why they broke 100% for the Republicans, and why that’s not really a good thing for the country, here ya go…
Ha! No one has more time to vote, and more reason to, than someone who’s well-being, income and healthcare, is paid directly by the govenment. There’s a reason “small government” Republicans ran against the cuts (read: needing, obvious cuts) to Medicare that were a part of HCR.
When your core constituency is dependent on the government and complete dedicated to the fight against socialism, you’d best get while the getting’s good, because that’s not a stable situation that can last terribly long. There are, of course ways to extend that cognitive dissonance…
Nor was it just business that was in peril: 300 million Americans were in the domino line as well. Just days before, the jobs, income, 401(k)’s and money-market funds of these citizens had seemed secure. Then, virtually overnight, everything began to turn into pumpkins and mice. There was no hiding place. A destructive economic force unlike any seen for generations had been unleashed.
Only one counterforce was available, and that was you, Uncle Sam. Yes, you are often clumsy, even inept. But when businesses and people worldwide race to get liquid, you are the only party with the resources to take the other side of the transaction. And when our citizens are losing trust by the hour in institutions they once revered, only you can restore calm.
When the crisis struck, I felt you would understand the role you had to play. But you’ve never been known for speed, and in a meltdown minutes matter. I worried whether the barrage of shattering surprises would disorient you. You would have to improvise solutions on the run, stretch legal boundaries and avoid slowdowns, like Congressional hearings and studies. You would also need to get turf-conscious departments to work together in mounting your counterattack. The challenge was huge, and many people thought you were not up to it.
By handling these issues the way he does, Beck unfortunately makes real debate more difficult—though at least millions of Americans now knowsomething about diversity, localism, and net neutrality. Unfortunately, they also “know” that Obama worships Satan, that the Internet is about to become a “public utility,” and that the FCC will shut down conservatives with network neutrality.
UPDATE: It’s quite sad to see Fox start to make this an “us vs the marxists/communists/terrorists/socialists/nazis” thing. Especially when the way they are going about it is to just play word association with their geriatric audience. Those folks don’t understand the Internets as it is, much less a discussion about the technical underpinnings. Beck using this ignorance to tell them the opposite of the truth (in the name of God, no less).
Beck also seems to think that the Republican led FCC was also actually run by marxists/communists/terrorists/socialists/nazis as they are the ones that started to notice that despite “Liberals” being voted into nearly two thirds of both houses of Congress (and then later the Presidency), 91% of political-talk radio was “Conservative”. And it was also controlled by a small group of huge corporations that used economies of scale to crush any competition. This is the result of the 1996 Telecom Act, not the result of the end of the fairness doctrine. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, deregulation leads to consolidation, not competition.
One of the most consistent ways to get a monopoly out of a market is to remove the rules that govern it. Eventually someone “wins”. Which means everyone else loses (in the context of the “market”). We’ve watched the banks do the same thing (deregulate, consolidate, “win”) in much the same time frame.
Now the pendulum is swinging back to rational land, and Beck is there to try and rewind the clock back to crazy-time. I wonder here if he knows he’s lying or has just kept himself ignorant of what the words he uses actually mean.
Actually, to be honest, I don’t really wonder all that much about what actors *really* thinks of politicis, and Beck is an actor extraordinairre. One of the highest paid enteratainers on the planets, thank to media consolidation, Rupert Murdoch, and the FCC rolling back media ownership rules under Bush (they also got a special exemption for News Corp to buy (and destroy) the WSJ).
In other words, when you are chowing down at the trough, you certainly don’t mind lying to your viewers to keep the gravy rolling. *chomp* *chomp* Net Neutrality *chomp* is *gulp* *chow* *chew* *chomp* marxists/communists/terrorists/socialists/nazis *!BUUUURRRRPP!!
Wow, where to start with this one. I’ve been reading a lot, as per, regarding what used to be a debate about much needed health care reform in this country. That debate has since devolved into mad, crazy fear-mongering and nutjobbery about the creeping tide of communism/fascism/LOUD NOISES coming to our country.
A quick stat for you: here’s a nice graph of all the companies that Obama has nationalized…
It should also be noted that of the nationalized business assets, the leaders of each corporation went to Washington D.C. and *begged* to be nationalized. In no case that anyone has seen has Obama, nor anyone in his administration been aggressive in this regard. We’ve even begun to see a profit on some of the money we invested.
To compare and contrast, take a look at Hugo Chavez. You’ll also note that in the case of Chavez, and every other historical power monger, they have had no fear of loudly declaring their intentions.
Sadly, to those of the crazed and dazed right of this country, it is in fact Obama’s lack of saying he wants pull any of this crap that means he really wants to. I know, I know, that doesn’t make any sense to sane and rational people, but that’s where we are at nowadays.
One of the major fears that opponents of health care reform (and more the point, foes of Democrats in general, as that who is really driving the “debate”) is the generalized fear of government that all Americans now seem to hold near and dear.
This fear tends to be illustrated by the mantra, “what has government ever done right?”
When I hear this, I’m always reminded of a wonderful scene from a movie about a guy who wasn’t quite Jesus.
The argument here, however, isn’t that government is the end-all, be-all solution to all problems. No one, outside of the Hugo Chavez’s of the world is making such an argument. The point here is simply that while often inefficient and frustrating, it’s nice to have clean water, and go the store and buy clean meat, and turn on the TV and have clean signals, and the list go on for a while.
Back to the greater point, what about totalitarianism? This is the actual fear that many Americans have, that an all powerful government will watch their every move, torture them, re-educate them, and the destroy their economy.
The really funny thing about contemporary Republicans (not to be confused with conservatives, who have largely been left out in the cold by the extremists) is that when this was actually happening, and the government was conducting warrantless wiretaps, torturing people, and destroying the economy by borrowing a trillion dollars to conduct a war sold on lies, there come from the right a defeanening silence, if not outright cheers.
Indeed, many decided that torture was all right for their safety, and warrantless wiretaps were needed for their safety, and invading countries that didn’t attack us was necessary for their safety. Back then (all the way back in 2008) the President needed to have all these powers and this vast leeway in order to protect the United States of America.
It was terribly frustrating to make the argument at that point that no, we really shouldn’t be starting a two-front war when the first front is stalled, and no, we really shouldn’t be torturing people, and no, borrowing money to blow stuff up was a bad idea, as anyone who stood up to this trend was quickly branded a GodlessTreasonous Anti-American. I would politely (well, relatively politely) point out that whatever powers were handed or conceded to Bush, would by proxy be handed to the next President, which at the time looked to be another Clinton.
This would generally generate a moment of pause, and then the nationalistic ferver would again take over and the “Love it or Leave it” chants would come louder.
Now the shoe is on the other foot, and finally many can see how poorly it fits their conception of our nation.
Where can we go from here is the question that probably bugs me most. We have an entrenched class of nattering nabobs who have convinced nearly half of the Republican party that our President isn’t even really an American.
What can you say to the deluded that brings them back down to reality? What can you do when evidence placed directly in front of their faces in ignored? How can you convince those convinced they are fighting the next Hitler/Mao/Stalin to take a deep breath, relax, and use their right to vote in the next election, and actually trust in the very fiber of our Democracy and trust in the Constitution they profess to love so much?
I certainly don’t know the best answer to these questions, but luckily I can accept comments and suggestions as to the right path. I know there is one, somewhere.
Perhaps I believe so because somewhere along the way, as I was protesting against the war, and the torture, and listened to those absolutely sure Bush would stage an attack to secure a third term, and then found them to be horribly mistaken, somewhere along that way I learned to breathe, and I learned to relax,. And I remembered to vote for what I thought was right.
I learned that change can come. Now that change is here, and the fear it brings came right along with it.
It looks like the latest strategery has been set in place for the McCain / Palin Campaig final two-week sprint.
From the looks of things, it’s a steady diet of the same: Smear, Lie, and Obfuscate. From an objective viewpoint, it seems like they are sticking with the same general plan I mentioned before and running against one another.
Several top Republicans, including Senators Susan Collins and Norm Coleman, have condemned the tactic. Asked about those criticisms, Palin at first dismissed the matter as “inside baseball stuff” and said it’s “some of the campaign top brass’s call on that.”
But when asked if she would approve the use of robocalls if she were running the campaign, Palin said she’d probably chart a different course.
—
Ultimately, the Alaska governor said she was not calling for an end to the automated calls, and she did not say if she had spoken to campaign officials at any point about the calls.
Nice, huh? First she says they suck, then she says she wouldn’t use them, then she says that she hasn’t done anything to stop them. Guess what I cut out…the part where she blames them on Obama.
“[The American People] get a bit irritated with just being inundated,” she continued, “and you’re seeing a lot of that of course with the huge amounts of money that Barack Obama is able to spend on his ads and his robocalls also.”
I haven’t seen anything about Obama robocalls from anyone except Free Republic (which I feel dirty linking to…but is the only thing I’ve found online that makes the accusation). The rest of the google turns up empty. At least now we know what Internet sites Sarah Palin reads.
Go and check out Free Republic some time. I dare you to read a whole thread on Obama or the Democrats, which is to say in Freeperville, PURE UNADULTERATED EVIL.
I wonder if anyone will follow up Palin’s hollow accusation regarding the robo-calls? I know the media *refuses* to follow up the allegation that Obama is a terrorist Muslim (and by “follow-up”, I’m using the Right-Wingian definition which translates to “Pass along rumors without research” in English), but maybe they could call St. Sarah out for this bold…assertion…based on what, exactly? Hmmm?
And yes, it does get better and more hypocritical. Are you ready for another round of Republican Scarewords: The Home Game!. That’s right, it time for another All-American episde SCAREWORDS!!
The scareword for the day is SOCIALIST!!!!!
Palin was also asked if she and McCain believe that Barack Obama’s tax plan, which would raise taxes on Americans making over $250,000 and provide tax credits to middle and lower-income workers, is SOCIALIST. At a campaign rally in New Mexico earlier Sunday, Palin said Obama wants to “experiment with SOCIALISM.”
“There are SOCIALIST principles to that, yes,” Palin said of Obama’s plan. “Taking more from a small business or small business owners or from a hard working family and then redistributing that money according to a politician’s priorities. There are hints of SOCIALSIM in there.”
Before we continue… a poll….
The questions for Sarah continued….And, BTW, this all happened when she tried to answer questions directly from the press. It’s why she contradicts herself from moment to moment. Asking questions like this are what journalists are supposed to do. It helps to find out if the hamsters upstairs are working, or just reading cue cards.
Asked if she thinks the government’s plan to inject billions of taxpayer dollars directly into troubled banks amounts to socialism — a belief held by many conservative legislators, talk radio hosts and bloggers — Palin said, “No, I do not.”
“I believe that there are those measures that had to be taken by congress to shore up not only the housing market but the credit markets also, to make sure that that’s not frozen, so that our small businesses have opportunities to borrow, and that was the purpose, of course, and that part of the bailout and the shoring of the banks,” she said.
To this anyone should scratch their heard. If you just reverse a couple of paragraphs, she’s saying the same thing backwards.
“I believe that there are those measures that had to be taken by congress to shore up not only the housing market but the credit markets also, to make sure that that’s not frozen, so that our small businesses have opportunities to borrow, and that was the purpose, of course, and that part of the bailout and the shoring of the banks,” she said.
“There are socialist principles to that, yes,” Palin said of [The Government’s] plan. “Taking more from a small business or small business owners or from a hard working family and then redistributing that money according to a politician’s priorities. There are hints of socialism in there.”
UPDATE: The previous bouts of hypocrisy and SCAREWORDS!! came from Colorado. The game continues from New Mexico. The game has evolved. Palin is now going after all three men in the campaign.
“Barack Obama calls it spreading the wealth. Joe Biden calls higher taxes patriotic,” Palin said. “But Joe the Plumber and Ed the Dairyman, I believe they think it sounds more like SOCIALISM.
“Friends, now is no time to experiment with SOCIALISM,” she told the cheering crowd.
She then continued her attacks on the Senator from Arizona that voted for the SOCIALIST bailout plan.
“Our opponents keep saying, ‘No, no, no,’ to sound and responsible energy solutions,” she said.
Yes, I know (and fact-checked) McCain’s record of voting against alternative energy consistently….
Obama said that McCain had voted 23 times against alternative energy:
Obama: Over 26 years, Senator McCain voted 23 times against alternative energy, like solar, and wind, and biodiesel.
Here’s the Obama campaign’s list of the 23 votes. We find they’re overstating the case. In many instances, McCain voted not against alternative energy but against mandatory use of alternative energy, or he voted in favor of allowing exemptions from these mandates. Only 11 of the 23 votes cited by the Obama campaign involve reducing or eliminating incentives for renewable energy.
Meanwhile, McCain was indignant at the suggestion that he’d voted against alternative energy at all.
McCain: I have voted for alternate fuel all of my time. … No one can be opposed to alternate energy.
But McCain’s record says differently. As we say above, he has voted against funding for alternative energy on 11 occasions. He may be in favor of alternative energy in theory, but he has declined opportunities to support it.
John McCain is dropping honor by the wayside in this campaign. The latest chapter involves a bunch of robots. Lying, evil robots.
I think we need to take a closer lok at that army of robots he has hired to lie for him. They are bothering people and calling Obama a Terrorist.
[yes, that’s the real audio. Someone did a nice job of putting it to culture]
The automated calls in Maine, Nevada and other states — they are commonly known as “robo calls” — say Obama “has worked closely with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, whose organization bombed the U.S. Capitol, the Pentagon, a judge’s home and killed Americans.”
The charge is misleading: The bombings, which took place more than 35 years ago, didn’t result in fatalities and the group didn’t claim responsibility for the attack on the judge’s home.
So McCain has hired a bunch of robots to lie for him. His campaign is totally on-board with these tactics, obviously.
The McCain campaign says the calls are warranted because Obama’s connection to Ayers — the two met many years after Ayers’ anti-Vietnam War activities had ended — raises questions about the Democrat’s judgment and record.
“This is an association that is highly questionable and not out of bounds,” McCain spokesman Rick Gorka said.
The tactics, using robots to spread lies, has been widely condemned by rational thinking people.
LAS VEGAS (AP) — Two senators in opposing political parties asked Republican presidential candidate John McCain to stop the automated phone calls that link Democratic candidate Barack Obama to a 1960s radical.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, and Sen. Susan Collins, a Maine Republican, made separate appeals to McCain on Friday. Collins faces a tough race for re-election and serves as a co-chairwoman of his Maine campaign.
“These kind of tactics have no place in Maine politics,” Collins spokesman Kevin Kelley said. “Sen. Collins urges the McCain campaign to stop these calls immediately.”
Not to be outdone personally, McCain is now openly accusing Obama of being the ultimate U.S. boogey-man buzzword…a “socialist”.
CONCORD, N.C. (AP) — Republican presidential candidate John McCain on Saturday accused Democratic rival Barack Obama of favoring a socialistic economic approach by supporting tax cuts and tax credits McCain says would merely shuffle wealth rather than creating it.
“At least in Europe, the Socialist leaders who so admire my opponent are upfront about their objectives,” McCain said in a radio address. “They use real numbers and honest language. And we should demand equal candor from Sen. Obama. Raising taxes on some in order to give checks to others is not a tax cut; it’s just another government giveaway.”
McCain, though, has a health care plan girded with a similar philosophy. He proposes providing individuals with a $5,000 tax credit to buy health insurance. He would pay for his plan, in part, by considering as taxable income the money their employer spends on their health coverage.
Remember, it’s not “socialism” when Mccain does it. It’s not “socialism” when he advocates the government directly buying mortgages. It’s not “socialsim” when he holds up a workin’-class everyman as, well, everyone. It can’t be, because, DUH!!!, McCain isn’t a socialist and Obama is.
McCain then continued with his UNABASHEDLY SOCIALIST RHETORIC.
[McCain] also was sharply critical of the Bush administration, saying it should be more aggressive in buying up the home mortgages of those trapped by high interest rates and falling housing values.
“The administration is not doing it. The secretary of the Treasury is not doing it,” McCain told the crowd. “We need to buy up these mortgages, give you a mortgage that you can afford, so you can pay your mortgage and realize the American Dream of owning your home.”
I don’t think McCain quite understands hows this works. Just because the Government buys your mortgage, it doesn’t mean that you, yourself, own it. The Government owns it. You still have to pay for it.
McCain seems to be saying that the Government can solve everyone’s problems by buying everyone’s mortgage and then giving them back to the People. That’s Socialist Rhetoric 101 people.
Now if that bit of hypocrisy isn’t enough for you, check this out.
Speaking to a boisterous crowd at Florida International University, McCain expressed dismay that the fame he brought on Joe Wurzelbacher has now turned the Ohio man into the focus of endless publicity, not all of it favorable.
For this, McCain blames his opponent, Barack Obama.
“The response from Senator Obama and his campaign yesterday was to attack Joe,” McCain said. “People are digging through his personal life and he has TV crews camped out in front of his house. He didn’t ask for Senator Obama to come to his house. He wasn’t recruited or prompted by our campaign. He just asked a question. And Americans ought to be able to ask Senator Obama tough questions without being smeared and targeted with political attacks.”
This is the most complete and utter crap I’ve heard this election season, and that’s saying A LOT. The guy tries to ambush Obama with a hypothetical question, conservatives go nuts over a soundbyte[*], “Joe” starts doing appearances on Fox and Rush, McCain himself brings up the guy 20 times during the debate….AND…..it’s Obama’s fault.
[*] BTW, in my long “Joe the Plumber” expose, I link to the entire, roughly 6-minute exchange between Sam and Obama. Obama ends with this bit…
Obama said his tax plan, which he said focuses on bigger breaks for people making lower incomes, would be good for the economy. “If you’ve got a plumbing business, you’re going to be better off if you’ve got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you,” he said. “Right now, everybody’s so pinched that business is bad for everybody. And I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”
Sounds like a fairly benign comment, right? Just pointing out that a rising tide lifts all ships, right?
No. You see, you have to read this (and you can’t watch the whole thing, that’s too easy). You need to read this through NutJob Republican eyes [i.e. like Rush, Hannity, and Fox]. When you do that, the exact same paragaph reads as…
SPREAD THE WEALTH AROUND!!!!1!! I WANT TO TAKE ALL YOUR MONEY AND SUPPRESS YOUR SPEECH AND GIVE IT TO THE OTHER BLACK PEOPLE!!!! I LOVE STALIN!!!!
And if you are “Joe the Plumber” you hear the above and you see a black guy in front of you, dancin’ like Sammy.
UPDATE: Or maybe tomorrow. Got everything updated (XP, Vista with Service Packs and video editing software, new version, and other patches, and a new monitor) and now we’re done with last week’s program. I am hoping to get these done and uploaded by Sunday night, Monday at the latest, so far I haven’t made it. My plan right now calls for 10 weeks of this stuff, which takes us right through the election. Feel free to offer feedback.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — President Bush asked Congress on Saturday for the authority to spend as much as $700 billion to purchase troubled mortgage assets and contain the financial crisis.
The legislative proposal – the centerpiece of what would be the most sweeping economic intervention by the government since the Great Depression – was sent by the White House overnight to lawmakers. (Read the text here.)
The plan matches the scope of the problem, Bush said.
“It is a big package because it’s a big problem,” Bush told reporters at a news conference. “The risk of doing nothing far outweighs the risk of the package.”
Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, lawmakers and their aides are expected to work through the weekend in an effort to craft a bill swiftly. Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill said they expect the bill to go before a vote within days.
Robot Pirate Ninja 