EENR 4 Progress: Let’s Elect Burner & Fallon!

Hey all, welcome to another edition of EENR for Progress. Tonight the bloggers of EENR are endorsing two fightin’ progressives from Iowa and Washington state; Ed Fallon and Darcy Burner! Follow me below the fold to learn more about why we have to help elect these two candidates to Congress in 2008….

Let’s Help Elect Fightin’ Progressive Ed Fallon!

There has been a ton of talk about electing more and better Democrats to Congress. We’ve been continually disappointed in the absence of a backbone when it comes to moderate Democrats. Many of them have failed us when it comes to protecting our civil liberties or cutting funding for the war in Iraq. The Democrats caved to Bush’s horrid economic stimulus plan which is yet another waste of billions of dollars. Isn’t it about time we replaced some of these Democrats? We helped unseat Wynn with fightin’ progressive Donna Edwards, now it’s time to replace moderate Democrat Leonard Boswell with fightin’ progressive Ed Fallon! Ed Fallon is a community activist and has been an Iowa state representative in Iowa for the last 14 years. He ran an impressive run for Governor in 2006 and now has his sights set on the seat occupied by moderate Democrat Leonard Boswell. Fellow Kossack Des Moines Dem has written extensively about the race here, here and here if you’d like a local perspective. Here’s a statement from Ed Fallon about why he’s running for Congress:

Our country needs and wants change.  I’m ready to take on the corporate interests who have corrupted our federal government.  I’m ready to give working families and the poor a voice in national politics.  I’m ready to do what I can to see that environmental issues are taken seriously inside the beltway.  I’m ready to apply what I’ve learned during 23 years of public service in Iowa and be a part of the solution in Washington.

Where Fallon Stands on the Issues

Fallon On Iraq

Ed Fallon was opposed to the war from the start. Fallon supports timetable for withdrawal and is in favor of immediately cutting funding for the continuation of the war. Fallon believes that we should allocate funds for a withdrawal and address our soldiers physical, mental and employment needs. Here’s a snippet from Fallon on his website:

It is now clear to nearly everyone that President Bush lied to Congress and to the American people when he spoke of weapons of mass destruction as the premise to go to war in Iraq.  I was among the tens of millions of Americans who opposed the war from the start, and who did not believe the President’s justification for invasion.

Fallon on Health Care and how his family was personally affected by the crisis

It’s rare to see a politician these days share the same health care struggles that millions of Americans face. Ed shares a story on his website about how his family couldn’t afford health insurance and the troubles they faced when dealing with a family injury:

One day my daughter Fionna, then age two, broke her leg sledding and we rushed her to Broadlawns  Medical Center. Though we had always received quality care at Broadlawns, there was no doctor on duty that day who could fix a broken leg. We lived only four blocks from Mercy Hospital but because we lacked insurance, mom and daughter were shipped by ambulance 110 miles to University Hospitals in Iowa City. This resulted in additional costs and loss of work for both parents.  

The care we received at University Hospitals was excellent, but the tab for Fionna’s leg came to over $5,000. Our family’s income was under $15,000 that year, so we approached the local human services office, only to be informed that we weren’t poor enough to quality for Title XIX! Two years and countless phone calls later, a payment plan was worked out and we received some assistance with the bill.

It’s nice to see a politician understand the reality that many of us are facing. It’s not surprising that Fallon supports UHC, and has vowed to fight hard for it when he is elected to Congress. Fallon supports a Medi-Care option which will focus on preventative care, mental, dental and vision care, hospice and longterm care and even alternative medicinal approaches. I like that Fallon doesn’t rule out alternative care. I was in a bad wreck and the only treatment that relieved my pain was acupuncture.

Fallon on Campaign Finance Reform

This may be the biggest issue of our time. I know what you’re thinking, campaign finance reform bigger than UHC? Yep. If we don’t get the lobbyist influence out of our government we won’t ever pass UHC! Fallon is already taking a stand I wish more of our Democratic legislators would. Here’s what he had to say about PAC/lobbyist money:

As a strong advocate for getting big money out of politics, I have never taken money from lobbyists or PACs, and I won’t accept it in this Congressional campaign either.

Fallon is a strong advocate for publicly financed campaigns. Fallon currently supports the Fair Elections Act in the Senate and has vowed to introduce or co-sponsor public financing legislation. His opponent otoh, Leonard Boswell takes bundles of PAC/lobbyist money. Between the months of Feb-Sept of 2007, 73% of Boswell’s money came from PACs. Ouch. Speaking of Fallon’s opponent….

Who Fallon is Up Against

Leonard Boswell is one of those Democrats that we’ve all been disappointed in. Boswell voted for the IWR, voted to declare the Iraq War as part of the war on terror and voted against a withdrawal back in 2007. While Boswell has a passable record on labor issues, his record on civil liberties is not acceptable considering he’s a Democrat. He voted to allow electronic surveillance without warrants back in 2006 and voted to allow overseas wiretapping without a FISA warrant just last year. Boswell also voted to make the Patriot Act permanent back in 2005 and voted to ban flag desecration. Want more? Boswell voted for the Bankruptcy bill in 2005 and for the repeal of the estate tax. Boswell has continued to support the Bush/Cheney energy policies and even voted against raising CAFE standards back in 2001. Boswell also supports building a fence along the Mexico border.

Does Boswell sound like a Democrat that represents your values? If we progressives have learned anything in the past few years, it’s that we can’t just be happy with a candidate because they have a D next to their name. Boswell does not represent the blue district of Des Moines Iowa. It’s time to help unseat Boswell with a fightin’ progressive! Please get involved in this race, Fallon needs our support!

Here’s How YOU can Help Elect Fallon

Fallon is running against a well financed machine that is propped up by PAC’s and lobbyists. Fallon has the right message, we just need to help give him the resources he needs to spread his message all across the 3rd district. We bloggers of EENR have set up an Act Blue page for Fallon, be generous and give what you can to Fallon! If you live in Iowa and want to help out the Fallon Campaign, there are numerous things you can do. You can make phone calls, canvass, help with events and even just show your support by sticking a yard sign in your front yard. Go here to learn about ways you can help the campaign. If you’d like to learn more about Fallon and where he stands on the issues you can visit his website here

Next up, EENR Endorses Darcy Burner!!!

In 2006, political newcomer Darcy Burner challenged Republican incumbent Dave Reichert. Burner lost by over 7,000 votes with one quarter of a million votes cast. This time, we need to help ensure a victory for progressives everywhere! Here’s a snippet from her website about what she’ll do for America in Congress:

She will work to put the country back on the right track by fighting to end the misguided war in Iraq; by fighting to restore responsibility and accountability to government; and by fighting to improve the lives of middle class families squeezed by the unfair policies of the Bush administration.

Where Darcy Stands on the Issues

On the Environment and Energy

Burner has promised to aggressively fight climate change. She also wants to invest in new energy efficiency programs and clean energy technologies as a way to create jobs and combat global warming.  Burner is also well aware of the problem regarding our water shortages, here’s what she had to say on the issue from an interview with Pacific Views:

Let’s come up with better technologies for water purification, let’s come up with better ways to conserve water, let’s come up with better technologies for water desalinization. Let’s come up with better ways of transporting water, more efficiently and more effectively. If we did that and we made some infrastructure investments, and we address the problem of climate change, we could head off, or cope with, many of the problems we’re talking about. But it’s a big thing, not a little thing

On the War in Iraq

Darcy Burner has been opposed to the war from the beginning. Burner supports a withdrawal from Iraq, and supports imposing benchmarks for the Iraqi government to gain control over their country. Burner has also blasted the wasteful spending in Iraq and slammed Halliburton for the loss of billions in taxpayer dollars. Here’s a little snippet from Burner:

“The war is busting our budget, breaking our military, and burning our bridges around the world,”?Burner says. “It is time to end it.”

On American Workers and Jobs

Darcy is a strong advocate for raising the minimum wage and strengthening the labor movement. Darcy believes in investing in job training, education and new industries that will help Americans affected by harmful trade deals. She is an advocate for fair trade where we enforce labor/environmental regulations as well as protect intellectual property standards abroad. Here’s a statement by Darcy from the Seattle Times about how she would fight for American jobs:

I would work to make sure your tax dollars don’t go toward subsidizing sending jobs overseas, to fight trade agreements that don’t provide a level playing field for American businesses and workers, and to build the next generation industries which will create good jobs right here at home.

Who Darcy is Up Against

Dave Reichert is a two term Republican Congressman who does not represent the constituents of the suburbs of Seattle. He is a Bush/Cheney loyalist and has voted with the Republican party line on the major issues facing this country. Reichert voted against a timetable for withdrawal in Iraq in 2005 and in 2007. Reichert is no friend to fiscal responsibility. He supports the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy and voted against AMT (alternative minimum tax) relief funded by closing the offshore tax loophole for big corp. Reichert, like Boswell, also voted to approve overseas wiretapping without a FISA warrant and voted to allow electronic surveillance with a warrant. Reichert is also a proponent of building a fence along the Mexico border and supported a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Reichert supported CAFTA and the recent NAFTA expansion into Peru, and voted against the Employee Free Choice Act. Reichert also opposed negotiating lower prescription drug prices through Medicare part D, and he voted for Pence’s horrid amendment that targeted funding for family services by Planned Parenthood for women living in poverty. If that wasn’t bad enough, he voted to allow nuclear waste to be stored at Hanford. I’m sure Washingtonians and Oregonians love that! Don’t you think the Seattle suburbanites deserve better that Reichert? I sure do!

Reichert is BFF with Bush

Bush has come out to WA repeatedly to hold fundraisers for Dave Reichert. Here’s what Bush had to say about Reichert just last year at a fundraiser held in Bellevue WA:

The most important priority of government — it’s one of the reasons I’m such a strong believer in Dave — is to protect the homeland. That’s our most important job. (Applause.) And Dave Reichert understands that. He understands that it’s possible for government to balance the need to understand the enemy and civil liberties. And we’re doing just that. He knows what I know, that we’ve got to use all assets of our power to protect you.

Are you scared yet? Are you ready to fight for Darcy Burner to unseat Bush’s buddy Reichert? I hope so! The bloggers of EENR have set up a fundraising page for fightin’ progressive Darcy Burner. Go here to donate to the campaign and help her beat Reichert. If you live in the Seattle area and want to help out with the campaign go here. If you’d like to learn more about Darcy Burner check out her website.

Thank you all for coming by! Let’s get to work for Darcy Burner and Ed Fallon and help elect more and better Democrats.

Polluted Water for the Troops in Iraq? Thanks KBR!

(what’s in your water… – promoted by pfiore8)

KBR Inc. may have supplied U.S. troops fighting in Iraq with tainted water according to a Pentagon inspector general’s report that was released today: Audit of Potable and Nonpotable Water in Iraq (PDF). KBR is a private contractor that, at the time they were supplying American bases in Iraq with polluted water, was owned by Halliburton.

According to the AP, Water makes U.S. troops in Iraq sick.

Soldiers experienced skin abscesses, cellulitis, skin infections, diarrhea and other illnesses after using discolored, smelly water for personal hygiene and laundry at five U.S. military sites in Iraq.

KBR’s water quality problems happened between January 2004 and December 2006.

It was impossible to link the dirty water definitively to all the illnesses, according to the report. But it said KBR’s water quality “was not maintained in accordance with field water sanitary standards” and the military-run sites “were not performing all required quality control tests.”

The water wasn’t used for drinking, but for washing, cleaning, and laundry. “Water used for hygiene and laundry must meet minimum safety standards under military regulations because of the potential for harmful exposure through the eyes, nose, mouth, cuts and wounds.”

According to the report, 45 percent of soldiers complained “hygiene water was discolored or had an unusual odor”, 10 percent reported their water quality concerns to command, and 4 percent of personnel claimed they had “water related medical problems”.

The Guardian reported that the “allegations of unsafe water supplies in Iraq first emerged during hearings held by Senate Democrats more than two years ago.” Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND) requested an investigation be done by the inspector general.

Dorgon said, “I think it’s outrageous that KBR tried to deny that there was a problem, especially when it turned out that there were dozens of US troops reporting water-related illnesses.”

However, with all the problems the military contractors have caused, there still is no move to curtail or eliminate their use. Rather Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI), chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said Congress would intensify their scrutiny of contractors. “If we are going to use contractors to perform this kind of activity in the future, we are going to have to do a much better job of supervising their activities,” Levin said.

Lovely. A promise of more and better Congressional oversight with no consequences in sight.

The water supply for U.S. civilians may not be much better. According to an AP probe, Drugs were found in America drinking water.

A vast array of pharmaceuticals — including antibiotics, anti-convulsants, mood stabilizers and sex hormones — have been found in the drinking water supplies of at least 41 million Americans…

In the course of a five-month inquiry, … discovered that drugs have been detected in the drinking water supplies of 24 major metropolitan areas — from Southern California to Northern New Jersey, from Detroit to Louisville, Ky.

Clean water is going to be harder and harder to find. Our next war may be over clean water, not oil.

Look! It’s a sex scandal!

While the corporate media are dancing on Eliot Spitzer’s political grave, and the supposedly lefty blogs are inventing new and exciting sludge bombs to sling at the Democrat they love to demonize, McClatchy has this:

Eight U.S. service members were killed in two attacks today in Iraq, making it the deadliest day against the military this year, a senior American military official in Baghdad said. At least 11 Iraqis also were killed Monday in a surge of attacks throughout the country.

Five of the Americans died when a suicide bomber walked up to a foot patrol in Baghdad and self-detonated. The others died while on a patrol in Diyala province, the official said. He asked not to be identified as he isn’t an official spokesman.

The rash of attacks against a spectrum of targets raised new questions about whether the U.S. can draw down its presence from the current buildup to levels of about a year ago.

Does it really raise questions? Does anyone seriously believe there are plans to get out? A couple weeks ago, sixteen year old Iraqi blogger Sunshine put Bush’s disaster into a better perspective than I or any other American blogger could:

The new operation is about to start as you know, I feel like it’ll work this time, although not everyone think so, because the troops announced the operation before it starts ..

I still have hope, I don’t know why.. All the ex-operations failed, but there is a voice inside my heart telling me to be optimistic .

I think about Iraq a lot, what happened and what’s going to happen. When I think about our future I wonder weather it’ll worth every thing we faced , Hopefully.

I open the curtain above my bed, look at the sky, and think…

If the troops will defeat the terrorists and we’ll have security, my relatives who live abroad will come to Iraq, and I’ll be able to see my aunt again, we’ll do whatever we want and wear what we like, without being afraid from terrorists .. I’ll feel more free to write about what I feel, and you’ll be able to see Sunshine, I won’t have to make voice interviews only ..

Oh god how much I miss planning to picnics and preparing for parties, I feel I am so close to live in safety, and see my relatives , neighbors , & friends who had to leave Iraq again.

Every bad thing we got through will be a memory only, we’ve been living in a war zone for four long years, full of sadness & fear. It was a bad experience and no one would love to go through that, but It’s out of my power, I can’t end the war, but we say “if you have lemon, make lemonade” there’s no bright side in the war, but in this four years I became stronger, and independent person, I believe in myself and I know nothing can stop me from moving forward, not even the war, nor terrorists when I have determination and faith ..

I realized how much I love Iraq, I didn’t know how much Iraq means to me, until I saw It destroyed.

Her optimism, even after having experienced so much disappointment and horror, should make any humane person ache. But the American media have more important things on which to focus. Because who cares about Iraqi civilians or American service personnel when there’s a sex scandal to be exploited?

We have met the enemy

And they are crazy as loons.

This is an Oklahoma Elected Official, gang…

Obama Fact Check rebuts NYT’s skewed article about Obama’s record

Crossposted from Daily Kos

~~

Obama campaign responds to this hit piece in NYT: Obama in Senate: Star Power, Minor Role, by Kate Zernike and Jeff Zeleny.

The fact check rebuttal can be found here:


Fact Check on New York Times Story that Minimizes Obama’s Senate Accomplishments

March 08, 2008

Full fact check post follows:

Fact Check on New York Times Story that Minimizes Obama’s Senate Accomplishments

March 08, 2008

RHETORIC:  “(Obama) was cautious – even on the Iraq war, which he had opposed as a Senate candidate, he voted against the withdrawal of troops. He proposed a drawdown only after he was running for president and polls showed voters favoring it.”  (New York Times, 3/9/07)

REALITY: Obama Began Calling For A Phased Withdrawal From Iraq In November 2005

11/22/05: Obama Called for A Phased Withdrawal From Iraq, A Commitment To Having No U.S. Bases In Iraq Within a Decade. “First and foremost, after the December 15 elections and during the course of next year, we need to focus our attention on how reduce the U.S. military footprint in Iraq. Notice that I say ‘reduce,’ and not ‘fully withdraw.’ This course of action will help to focus our efforts on a more effective counter-insurgency strategy and take steam out of the insurgency…Second, we need not a time-table, in the sense of a precise date for U.S. troop pull-outs, but a time-frame for such a phased withdrawal. More specifically, we need to be very clear about key issues, such as bases and the level of troops in Iraq. We need to say that there will be no bases in Iraq a decade from now and the United States armed forces cannot stand-up and support an Iraqi government in perpetuity – pushing the Iraqis to take ownership over the situation and placing pressure on various factions to reach the broad based political settlement that is so essential to defeating the insurgency.” (Obama Speech, 11/22/05)

12/8/05: Obama Said He Supported A Phased Withdrawal To Avoid Security Vacuum; Said War In Iraq To Blame For Terrorist Problems. Obama favors starting ‘a phased withdrawal process’ of troops next year. The process would be based on what happens with the elections, he said. ‘What we’re engaged in is a difficult balancing act here…Having gone in, how do we step back but ensure that there’s not such a vacuum that either chaos occurs or jihadists take over critical areas that can make huge problems elsewhere? The irony, of course, is that there really wasn’t a terrorist problem before we went in. There is now.'” (State Journal-Register, 12/8/05)

1/8/06: Obama Said It Was Important To Start Phasing Down Troops. The Sun-Times wrote, “Obama said ‘if we don’t see significant political progress’ over the next six months or so, ‘we can pour money and troops in here until the cows come home but we are not going to be successful.’ It is important, Obama said, ‘to start phasing down the troops’ and ‘to give the Iraqis more ownership.'” (Chicago Sun-Times, 1/8/06)

4/13/06: Obama Said U.S. Should Start Phasing Down U.S. Troop Presence In Iraq By The End Of The Year. At a town hall meeting, Obama said, “‘If I continue to see what seems to be the case right now–an inability and unwillingness on the part of the various factions to want to live together–we can’t be in a position where we’re in the middle of a civil war…If we’re not seeing a government that is actually committed to working together, then I don’t see how our presence there can be helpful,’ Obama said. Even if a new government is formed, Obama said, by the end of the year ‘our job as the police and army of Iraq should be complete. We will have done our task and we should start phasing down our troops.'” (Chicago Tribune, 4/13/06)

REALITY: Times Downplayed Significance Of Obama’s Ethics Reform Legislation, Which Was Hailed As The “Most Sweeping” Overhaul Since Watergate


Obama Was A Key Player In Assembling And Passing The 2007 Ethics Reform Law, Which Curbed The Influence Of Lobbyists And Was Described As The “Most Sweeping Since Watergate.” In the first week of the 110th Congress, Obama joined with Senator Feingold to introduce a “Gold Standard” ethics package. Many of the Obama/Feingold bill’s most important provisions were included in the final ethics reform package passed by the Senate in late January: a full ban on gifts and meals from lobbyists including those paid by the firms that employ lobbyists; an end to subsidized travel on corporate jets; full disclosure of who’s sponsoring earmarks and for what purpose; additional restrictions to close the revolving door between public service and lobbying to ensure that public service isn’t all about lining up a high-paying lobbying job; and requiring lobbyists to disclose the contributions that they “bundle” – that is, collect or arrange – for members of Congress, candidates, and party committees. The Washington Post wrote in an editorial that “…Mr. Reid, along with Sens. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.), deserves credit for assembling and passing this package.” In September 2007, the AP reported, “President Bush signed a bill Friday that will require lawmakers to disclose more about their efforts to fund pet projects and raise money from lobbyists, a measure that backers call the biggest ethics reform in decades…Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. who had pushed for the bundling provisions and was one of four lawmakers who participated in a Democratic conference call to reporters said the measure marks “the most sweeping ethics reform since Watergate.” (S. 230, 110th Congress; S.1, Became Public Law 109-110-81, 9/14/07; AP, 9/15/07; Washington Post, Editorial, 1/21/07)

NYT: 2007 Ethics Reform Bill “Quickly Sent A Ripple Of Fear Through K Street” And Was “Already Changing The Culture Of Washington” Before It Was Signed Into Law, Beginning With “More Dutch Treats And Fewer Steak Dinners.” “The new law has quickly sent a ripple of fear through K Street…Stanley Brand, a longtime Washington defense lawyer who usually represents Democrats, said the law was a sea change. ”It should send shivers down lobbyists’ spines,” Mr. Brand said. ‘It is a minefield now…President Bush has not said whether he would sign the bill, but it is already changing the culture of Capitol Hill in myriad ways, beginning with more Dutch treats and fewer steak dinners…One lobbyist, who would speak only anonymously to avoid attracting the attention of prosecutors or rivals, said he had started sending himself date-stamped e-mail to create a record of every phone conversation he had with a lawmaker. Then he stopped making campaign contributions…For lobbyists — who live at the nexus of contributions and favors — it is an alarming trend. ”They might as well just pull up the paddy wagon outside the Capital Grille,” one lobbyist said, referring to a clubby steakhouse near the Capitol that is a well-known K Street hangout. (New York Times, 8/7/07)

Good Government Groups: Ethics Reform “Shouldn’t Be Belittled.” The good-government groups that criticized Mrs. Clinton took issue with her comments about the ethics reform bill. While she voted for it, she has suggested that the legislation was not a landmark change and that Mr. Obama was hardly alone in championing it. Fred Wertheimer, president and chief executive of Democracy 21, which promotes campaign finance reform, said the bill contained some of ”the most important and comprehensive ethics and lobbying reforms since the Watergate era.” Meredith McGehee, policy director of the Campaign Legal Center, said: ”I think it should be seen as the decent, credible and substantial legislation that it was. It shouldn’t be belittled.” (New York Times, 1/15/08)

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid: Obama Stepped Forward, Did a Wonderful Job. Senator Reid said, “And finally, Senator Obama. I chose personally Senator Obama last year to work on ethics and lobbying reform, and he’s done a wonderful job. He’s stepped forward. He’s been a leader with Senator Feingold…And I admire and respect his stalwartness in moving forward on this.” (Press Conference Transcript, Federal News Service, 1/18/07)

Washington Post Said Obama Deserved Credit For “Strongest Ethics Legislation…Yet.” The Washington Post wrote in an editorial, “The final package is the strongest ethics legislation to emerge from Congress yet…Mr. Reid, along with Sens. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.), deserves credit for assembling and passing this package.” (Washington Post, Editorial, 1/20/07)

Chicago Tribune: Obama and Feingold Pressured the Senate Into Adopting Tougher Ethics Reforms. “After Democratic and Republican leaders introduced their bipartisan working version of an ethics plan, pressure from Obama and Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) inspired them to open the measure up for some tougher restrictions.” (Chicago Tribune, 1/19/07)

Madison Capital Times: Obama’s Work On Ethics Legislation Strengthens Case For Presidency Candidacy. In an editorial, the Madison Capital Times wrote of Obama and Feingold, “The two senators are sponsoring groundbreaking ethics legislation that they say will improve upon Senate Bill 2349, the lobbying disclosure and ethics measure that the Senate passed in March 2006. ‘Our goal,’ say Feingold and Obama, ‘is to restore the public’s faith that Congress places its interest ahead of special interests.’ The bottom line is that this is a real reform. No one will be surprised that Feingold’s name is associated with this effort. But the fact that Obama is so willing to be a part of it will only strengthen the case for consideration of his potential presidential candidacy.” (Madison Capital Times, 1/12/07)

Dayton Daily News: Obama Ethics Amendments Got Reform Bill Improved Instead of Watered Down. The Dayton Daily News wrote in an editorial, “Indeed, the bill goes further than Democrats even promised during the campaign. This was one of those rare occasions when a reform bill is introduced, then, rather than get watered down, gets watered up. This fact has been widely attributed to the work of Sens. Barack Obama, D-Ill., and Russ Feingold, D-Wis. They proposed reforms that the other senators – while reportedly not happy about – decided they couldn’t oppose in the current political environment.” (Dayton Daily News, Editorial, 1/24/07)

RHETORIC: “He worked with Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma and one of the most conservative in the chamber, to establish a public database to examine government spending after Hurricane Katrina.”

REALITY: New York Times Downplayed Significance Of Obama’s “Google For Government” Bill, Which Was A Landmark Effort In Bringing Transparency To Federal Spending And Was Passed Against Strong Opposition

Providence Journal: Coburn And Obama “Deserve Credit For Fighting Doggedly For This Legislation.” “What a great idea: Create a searchable online data base of federal grants and contracts, identifying the members of Congress behind the spending, so that citizens, even on their home computers, can easily determine where, how and why the government is spending their money. A bill to do just that, sponsored by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., with the bipartisan support of such heavy hitters as Republican Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., Democratic Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., and John McCain, R-Ariz., has passed the Senate and may soon become law…For a time it looked dicey. In an impressive display of the arrogance of power, two of Congress’s most egregious kings of pork – Sens. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska., and Robert Byrd, D-W.Va. – secretly put a hold on the legislation. After citizens groups smoked out this betrayal of the public, Byrd and Stevens backed off…That may be why liberal Democrats have joined with conservatives on the bill. It presents an opportunity to break the deathgrip of incumbency.  Coburn and the co-sponsor, Sen. Barak Obama, D-Ill., deserve credit for fighting doggedly for this legislation.”  (Providence Journal Editorial, 9/20/06)

The Google For Government Bill Was A “Fine Accomplishment” And “Passed Largely Because Of The Bipartisan Leadership Of Tom Coburn, R-Okla And Barack Obama, D-Ill” “The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act is a fine accomplishment. It will create an earmark database that the public can easily access on the Internet. The bill passed largely because of the bipartisan leadership of senators Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and Barack Obama, D-Ill.”  (Chattanooga Times Free Press, 10/15/06)

RHETORIC: “While some senators spent hours in closed-door meetings over immigration reform in early 2007, he dropped in only occasionally, prompting complaints that he was something of a dilettante.   He joined a bipartisan group, which included Senator John McCain of Arizona, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, and Mr. Kennedy, that agreed to stick to a final compromise bill even though it was sure to face challenges from interest groups on both sides.  Yet when the measure reached the floor, Mr. Obama distanced himself from the compromise, advocating changes sought by labor groups. The bill collapsed. To some in the bipartisan coalition, Mr. Obama’s move showed an unwillingness to take a tough stand.”

REALITY: New York Times Falsely Implied That Obama Has Not Been Committed To Immigration Reform, And Neglected To Mention The Key Role He Played In Major Debates

Gannett: “Low-Ranking Obama Front-And-Center On Immigration.” In an article entitled, “Low Ranking Obama Front-And-Center On Immigration, Gannett News Service reported, “When the president sat down with eight senators to strategize about immigration last week, the group represented the Senate’s elite on the issue. Among them were the top Democratic and Republican leaders, those from border states, two Hispanics and those with a history of involvement with immigration legislation.  And then, there was Sen. Barack Obama, Illinois’ junior senator, who ranks 98 out of 100 in seniority in the Senate. He is not on the Senate’s Judiciary Committee where immigration legislation originated and the state he represents is closer to the Canadian border than the deserts of Mexico…Alejandro Lugo, an associate professor of anthropology at the University of Illinois who studies border issues, says Obama’s recognition of a border control problem coupled with a practical solution will play well if people are paying attention.” (Gannett News Service, 5/1/06)

Kennedy And McCain, Authors Of Immigration Reform Bill, Thanked Obama As One Of Small Bipartisan Group Of Senators Who “Stood Together To Make This Legislation Possible.” McCain said, “After several weeks of extensive debate and consideration of numerous and complicated amendments, the Senate is about to move to final passage on S. 2611, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act…I also commend the Senate Leadership on both sides of the aisle for their efforts to ensure that the Senate addressed this important issue and gave us more than adequate time for a thorough debate. This is a proud moment for the United States Senate, as we have conducted good work and returned to orderly traditions of the legislative process as envisioned by our founding fathers…And of course, I commend Senator Kennedy, who is perhaps the leading expert on this difficult issue…I also want to thank Senators Brownback, Lieberman, Graham, Salazar, Martinez, Obama, and Dewine for their shared commitment to this issue, and working to ensure this bill moved successfully intact through the legislative process.”  In a speech on the Senate floor, Kennedy said, “I thank those of our bipartisan group who stood together to make this legislation possible–Senator Graham, Senator Salazar, Senator Martinez, Senator Hagel, Senator Durbin, Senator Lieberman, Senator Brownback, Senator Obama, and Senator DeWine.” (McCain Press Release, 5/25/06; Congressional Record, 5/26/06)

Illinois Coalition For Immigrants And Refugee Rights Praised Obama For Leadership In Moving Congress Towards New Immigration Laws.  “Fred Tsao, policy director for the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, praised U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.) for their leadership in moving toward new immigration laws on Capitol Hill.  But ‘we must demand similar leadership from the president and the speaker of the House,’ he said. ‘We need real comprehensive immigration reform that will allow the undocumented to gain legal status, bring families together, respect hard work and help students realize their dreams.'”  (Chicago Sun-Times, 4/24/06)

Obama Passed Amendments To The Senate’s 2006 Immigration Bill That Would Have Established An Employment Verification System And Protected American Workers From Losing Jobs To Guest Workers.  In 2006, Obama passed an amendment to the Senate’s comprehensive immigration reform bill that ensured that prevailing wage requirements apply to all workers covered by the bill’s wage protection provisions.  In a speech on the Senate floor, Obama said, “This amendment essentially says that the prevailing wage provisions in the underlying bill should be tightened to ensure that they apply to all workers and not just some workers. The way the underlying bill is currently structured, essentially those workers who fall outside of Davis-Bacon projects or collective bargaining agreements or other provisions are not going to be covered…Everybody in this Chamber has agreed that if we are going to have a guest worker program, it should only be made available where there is a genuine need that has been shown by the employers that American workers are not available for those jobs. Without this amendment, that will not be the case…”  Obama was also an original cosponsor of an amendment that would strike the underlying bill’s employment verification system and replace it with an electronic verification system that would allow employers to verify the legal status of workers within three days. If a worker’s status could not be verified, it would obligate the employer to discharge the worker. It would allow legitimate workers wrongly discharged because of a verification system error to be compensated by the government for lost wages. It would fine employers up to $20,000 for each unauthorized worker hired but the system would not take effect until 18 months after Congress appropriated the $400 million needed to put the program in place. The underlying bill did not pass. (S. Amdt. 4177, Vote 140, Adopted 59-39 (R 17-37; D 41-2; I 1-0); 5/23/06; CQ, 5/23/06; SA 3971 as modified agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote, 5/17/06; Obama Press Release, 5/17/06)

RHETORIC: “And while he rightly takes credit for steering through an ethics overhaul that reformers called a ‘gold standard,’ like most freshmen he did not play a significant role in passing much other legislation and disappointed some Democrats for not becoming a more prominent voice in other important debates.” (New York Times, 3/9/08)

REALITY: Obama Has Passed Several Important Laws In The Senate, Including Legislation To Prevent Terrorists From Obtaining WMDs, Increasing U.S. Investment In Alternative Energy, And Improving Services For Our Troops And Veterans

ETHICS/TRANSPARENCY

Obama Was A Key Player In Assembling And Passing The 2007 Ethics Reform Law, Which Curbed The Influence Of Lobbyists And Was Described As The “Most Sweeping Since Watergate.” In the first week of the 110th Congress, Obama joined with Senator Feingold to introduce a “Gold Standard” ethics package.  Many of the Obama/Feingold bill’s most important provisions were included in the final ethics reform package passed by the Senate in late January: a full ban on gifts and meals from lobbyists including those paid by the firms that employ lobbyists; an end to subsidized travel on corporate jets; full disclosure of who’s sponsoring earmarks and for what purpose; additional restrictions to close the revolving door between public service and lobbying to ensure that public service isn’t all about lining up a high-paying lobbying job; and requiring lobbyists to disclose the contributions that they “bundle” – that is, collect or arrange – for members of Congress, candidates, and party committees.  The Washington Post wrote in an editorial that “…Mr. Reid, along with Sens. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.), deserves credit for assembling and passing this package.”  In September 2007, the AP reported, “President Bush signed a bill Friday that will require lawmakers to disclose more about their efforts to fund pet projects and raise money from lobbyists, a measure that backers call the biggest ethics reform in decades…Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. who had pushed for the bundling provisions and was one of four lawmakers who participated in a Democratic conference call to reporters said the measure marks “the most sweeping ethics reform since Watergate.”  (S. 230, 110th Congress; S.1, Became Public Law 109-110-81, 9/14/07; AP, 9/15/07; Washington Post, Editorial, 1/21/07)

Obama Passed A Bill Creating A “Google-like” Database For The Public To Search Details About Federal Funding Awards. In 2006, Obama was an original cosponsor of a bill to create a “Google-like” database of information on federal spending.  The bill requires the OMB by January 1, 2008, to make available to the public a searchable, free website that includes the (1) amount; (2) transaction type; (3) funding agency; (4)  North American Industry Classification System code or Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number; (5) program source; (6) an award title descriptive of the purpose of each funding action; (7) the name and location of the recipient and the primary location of performance; and (8) a unique identifier of the recipient and any parent entity. The site must allow users to conduct separate searches that distinguish between awards that are grants, sub-grants, loans, cooperative agreements, and other forms of financial assistance and awards that are contracts, subcontracts, purchase orders, task orders, and delivery orders.  (S. 2590, Passed by Unanimous Consent, 9/7/06; Became PL 109-282, 9/26/06)  SEE THE DATABASE HERE

Obama Passed Into Law Legislation Requiring Lobbyists To Disclose Their Bundling Activity, Making Him Unpopular Even Among Other Democrats.  Obama sponsored an amendment to require lobbyists to disclose the candidates, leadership PACs, or political parties for whom they collect or arrange contributions, and the aggregate amount of the contributions collected or arranged. The amendment was passed by unanimous consent and attached to the Senate ethics bill, which was signed into law on September 15, 2007. The New York Times wrote, “The disclosure idea’s lead sponsor, Senator Barack Obama… ‘has not been the most popular person in our caucus in the last couple of weeks,’ said a Democratic aide involved in deliberations over the bill.” (S. Amdt. 41 to S. 1, S. Amdt. 3, Submitted 1/11/07, Agreed to By Unanimous Consent, 1/18/07; S. 1, Signed into Law 9/14/07; New York Times, 1/20/07; CQ, 9/15/07)

FOREIGN POLICY

Obama Passed Law Requiring Comprehensive Nuclear Threat Reduction Strategy To Secure Weapons And Usable Nuclear Material. “Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) and Representative Adam Schiff (D-CA) announced that a provision authored by Obama and Senator Hagel (R-NE) in the Senate and advanced by Schiff in the House requiring a comprehensive nuclear threat reduction plan passed as part of the omnibus appropriations bill. This provision requires the President to submit to Congress a comprehensive plan for ensuring that all nuclear weapons and weapons-usable material at vulnerable sites around the world are secure by 2012 from the threats that terrorists have shown they can pose. The Senate passed the omnibus appropriations bill last night and the House approved the same bill today. It will now be sent to the President to be signed into law…The Comprehensive Nuclear Threat Reduction provision requires the President to develop a strategy that will: ensure that all nuclear weapons and weapons-usable material at vulnerable sites around the world are secure by 2012 against the threats that terrorists have shown they can pose; ensure adequate accounting and security for such materials on an ongoing basis thereafter; include a plan for expanding the financial support and other assistance provided by other countries, particularly Russia, the European Union and its member states, China and Japan, for the purposes of securing nuclear weapons and weapons-usable material worldwide; and outline the progress in and impediments to securing an agreement from all countries that possess nuclear weapons or weapons-usable material on a set of global nuclear security standards, consistent with their obligation to comply with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1540.” (Obama Press Release, 12/20/07)

Obama Passed Legislation To Keep Weapons Of Mass Destruction Out Of The Hands Of Terrorists. In 2006, Obama was an original co-sponsor of legislation to expand U.S. cooperation to destroy conventional weapons. It also expands the State Department’s ability to detect and interdict weapons and materials of mass destruction. The legislation was included in an appropriations bill that was later signed into law by the president. (Congress, S. 2566, Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 456, 5/25/06; Provisions included in H.R. 6060/P.L. 109-706)

Obama Passed Law to Promote Relief, Security, and Democracy in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In 2005, Obama sponsored the Democratic Republic of the Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act of 2006.  The bill would set forth specified U.S. political, social, civil, and economic policy objectives (policy objectives) with respect to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and obligated a specified minimum amount of foreign assistance funding for FY2006-FY2007.  (S.2125, 12/16/05, Become Public Law No: 109-456, 12/22/06)

HEALTH CARE

Obama Passed An Amendment Into Law That Pressured The EPA to Comply With New Lead-Paint Regulations After Seven Years of Delay. In 2005, Obama passed an amendment, which became law, to the FY 2006 Department of Interior Appropriations Act prohibiting the use of funds in the bill to delay or contravene implementation of an existing but unmet statutory requirement passed by Congress in 1992 that the EPA rewrite regulations on dispersal of lead paint by home remodeling contractors by October 1996. As of July 2005, the regulations still had not been written. Weeks after Obama’s amendment passed the Senate, Obama received commitments in writing and during a Senate hearing that the EPA would comply with the law. According to an Obama press release, “In 1992, Congress required the EPA to write regulations relating to the dispersal of lead paint by contractors during home remodeling by October, 1996. As of July 2005, these regulations still have not been written. In April, Administrator Johnson stated that to address the problem of lead paint poisoning, the EPA ‘will determine what additional steps may be necessary, including regulation’ despite the fact that the 1992 law does not say the regulations are optional.” (SA 1061 agreed to in Senate by Unanimous Consent, 6/28/05, Obama Press Release, 7/25/05; H.R. 2361, Became Public Law No: 109-54, 8/2/05)

EPA Finally Published Nine-Years-Overdue Proposal For Lead Paint Regulations Four Months After Obama Passed Legislation And Held Up EPA Nominations. Building Products wrote, “The EPA recently published long-overdue proposed regulations that affect contractors working on older houses that contain lead-based paints. The regulations, if adopted, would require that contractors be trained in lead-safe work practices and be certified by the EPA. The rules also would impose protective standards for those working on houses with lead paint. In 1992, Congress directed the EPA to write regulations that would limit lead paint pollution during home remodeling by October 1996. By last summer, with no sign of the new regulations, U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, D-III., introduced more legislation designed to encourage the EPA to publish the rules. When that didn’t work, Obama announced in the fall that he would block the appointment of every nominee to top EPA jobs until the agency produced the new rules. The EPA finally announced the proposed regulations Dec. 29, 2005.” (Building Products, March-April, 2006)

Obama Passed A Law Requiring The Defense Secretary To Report On The Pentagon’s Efforts To Prepare For Military And Civilian Personnel For A Possible Influenza Outbreak. In 2006, Obama sponsored an amendment to the FY 2006 Defense Authorization Act that required the Secretary of Defense to report to Congress on the Pentagon’s efforts to prepare for pandemic influenza, including pandemic avian influenza, including status on the procurement of vaccines, public health containment measures that could be implemented on military bases and other facilities; surge capacity for the provision of medical care during pandemics; surveillance efforts domestically and internationally and how such efforts are integrated with other ongoing surveillance systems; the integration of pandemic and response planning with those of other Federal departments; collaboration (as appropriate) with international entities engaged in pandemic preparedness and response.  (SA 1453 as modified agreed to in Senate by Unanimous Consent, 11/18/05; S. 1042/H.R. 1815, Became Public Law No: 109-163)

Obama Passed Legislation Providing $25 Million In Funding For Avian Flu Research And Containment Efforts By U.S. Agencies In South East Asia. “The amendment calls for greater investment in our preparedness efforts by providing more than $3 billion to build a stockpile of antiviral drugs and necessary medical supplies…Obama first introduced legislation in April requiring the United States to stockpile antiviral drugs…In May, Obama worked with a bipartisan group of Senators to appropriate the $25 million called for in the Foreign Assistance Act authorization bill. This money is currently being used by U.S. agencies in South East Asia to combat and contain possible outbreaks of avian flu.” (Obama Press Release, 1/12/07)

ENERGY

Obama Passed Legislation Creating A Tax Credit For The Installation Of E-85 Fuel Pumps. In 2005, Obama introduced legislation that provided a tax credit for up to 50% of the cost of installing an E-85 pump. Obama passed the tax credit as an amendment to the 2005 transportation bill.  The amendment was not included in the final version of the bill but was signed into law as part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The AP reported, “Under the provision, gas stations would get a tax credit to install equipment accommodating E-85 – an ethanol-based fuel alternative that its promoters say is up to 50 cents cheaper per gallon than unleaded gasoline.  The credit would cover 30 percent of the installation costs at a given station up to $30,000…Freshman Sen. Barack Obama introduced the tax-credit measure in the Senate in the spring, and it was co-sponsored by Illinois’ other Democratic senator, Dick Durbin. Obama also worked for the credit’s inclusion in the energy bill as one of the conferees preparing the Senate-House conference committee report…” (AP, 7/27/05; H.R. 6, Became Public Law No: 109-58; S. 918, 109th Congress; SA 670 agreed to, 5/12/05; H.R. 6, Became Public Law No: 109-58; S. 918, Referred to the Committee On Environment and Public Works)

Obama Passed An Amendment Into Law To Fund Research For Hybrid/Flex Fuel Vehicles. In 2005, Obama sponsored an amendment, which was signed into law, to the Energy Policy Act that established an applied research program to improve technologies for the commercialization of a combination hybrid/flexible fuel vehicle; or a plug-in hybrid/flexible fuel vehicle.  The program would provide grants with preference to proposals that achieve the greatest reduction in miles per gallon of petroleum fuel consumption, achieve not less than 250 miles per gallon of petroleum fuel consumption and have the greatest potential of commercialization to the general public within 5 years. (SA 851 to HR 6, Passed by Unanimous Consent, 6/23/05; H.R. 6, Became Public Law No: 109-58)

EDUCATION

Obama Passed Legislation Into Law Making Black Colleges Eligible For $15 Million In Federal Funding.  In 2007, Obama introduced legislation that would make a predominantly black institution eligible for federal grant money.  The legislation was written into the “The bill would define a PBI as a college of at least 1,000 undergraduates in which Blacks represent 40 percent or more of the student body. At least half of all undergraduates also must be low-income or first-generation students.  The legislation would provide a minimum grant of $250,000. Jackson, another NAFEO board member, says Medgar Evers could find immediate uses for the funding.”  (S. 1513, Referred to HELP Committee, 5/24/07; H.R. 2669, Became Public Law, 9/7/07; Diverse Issues In Higher Education, 6/29/07)

Obama Passed Into Law An Amendment Establishing A Grant Program To Support Summer Curricula That Emphasize Math And Problem Solving. In 2007, Obama sponsored an amendment, which became law, to the America Competes Act that established a competitive state grant program to support summer learning opportunities with curricula that emphasize mathematics and problem solving. (S.Amdts. 924, Agreed to by unanimous consent, 4/25/07; S. 761, Incorporated into H.R. 2272, which became P.L. 110-289, 8/9/07)

MILITARY ISSUES/VETERANS

Obama Passed An Amendment, Which Became Law, Preventing The VA From Conducting A Review Of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Cases Aimed At Reducing Benefits. In 2005, Obama was an original cosponsor of an amendment that became law preventing the VA from conducting a review of cases, without first providing Congress with a complete report regarding the implementation of such review. In November 2005, the VA announced that it was abandoning its planned review. “Obama had several generations of veterans in mind, he suggested, when he joined fellow Democrats Richard Durbin (Ill.), Patty Murray (Wash.) and Daniel Akaka (Hawai’i) Sept. 22 on a successful amendment to block the Department of Veterans Affairs from reviewing case files of 72,000 veterans rated 100-percent disabled by post-traumatic stress disorder…VA officials believe some PTSD claims have been decided for veterans without proper documentation. They announced their massive review only after the VA inspector general studied 2,100 randomly selected cases of PTSD disability awards and found that 25 percent lacked documents to verify that a traumatic, service-connected incident occurred…But the Senate’s amendment would bar the VA from conducting its case review until it justifies the program to Congress.” (SA 1864 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote, 9/22/05; Became Public Law No: 109-114; Military Update, 10/3/05)

Obama Passed Legislation, Which Became Law, Improving And Increasing Services For Homeless Veterans. In 2006, Congress passed a Veterans Affairs Committee bill which included several provisions originating in Obama’s SAVE Act (S. 1180) and Homes for Heroes Act (S. 3475).  “The legislation…includes a number of proposals from legislation Senator Obama had previously introduced (S.1180, the SAVE Act and S.3475 the Homes for Heroes Act) to expand and improve services for homeless veterans. The bill permanently authorizes and increases funding to $130 million per year for a competitive grant program to provide homeless services to veterans. It greatly increases a successful program to provide rental vouchers to homeless veterans. The legislation extends programs to providing treatment for veterans with mental illnesses and other special needs. And it permanently extends VA’s ability to transfer property it owns to homeless shelters.”  (S. 3421/P.L. 109-461; S. 1180, 109th Congress; S. 3475, 109th Congress; Obama Press Release, 6/26/06)

Obama Passed Legislation Extending Tax Credits For Military Families By Allowing Service Members Deployed In War Zones To Apply Non-Taxable Combat Pay To The EITC. In 2006, Congress passed legislation based on a proposal sponsored by Obama, Kerry, and Pryor that extended tax credits for military families by allowing service members deployed to war zones to apply their non-taxable combat pay toward the Earned Income Tax Credit. The amendment was introduced during debate on the Senate’s 2006 tax reconciliation bill, ruled out of order, but later included in the Gulf Opportunity Zone Act, which passed both chambers and became law on December 22, 2005. (H.R. 4440, Became P.L. 109-135, 12/22/05; SA 2616, 109th Congress)

Obama Passed An Amendment, Which Became Law, To Require The VA To Conduct A Campaign To Inform Disabled Vets Of Disparities In Compensation And Explaining Their Rights To Seek Review. In 2005, Obama was an original cosponsor on an amendment requiring the VA to conduct a campaign to inform veterans in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Connecticut, Ohio and New Jersey about their right to seek a review of their past claims. Specifically, the legislation required the VA to send letters to all veterans currently receiving disability who live in six states with a past history of below-average disability compensation, informing them of the past disparity, and explaining how to request a review of past claims and ratings and how to submit new claims. The VA was also required to inform all other veterans whose past claims may have been properly denied of this disparity by other means such as broadcast of print advertising. States whose average annual disability compensation payment was less than $7,300 qualified as below average. In 2003, Illinois veterans received an average of $6,802. The amendment became law on November 30, 2005.   (S. Amdt. 1865, Passed by Voice Vote, 9/22/05, to H.R.2528, Signed by the President and Became Public Law No: 109-114 on 11/30/05)

HOMELAND SECURITY/DISASTER RESPONSE

Obama Passed A Law Initiating A Long Overdue Investigation Into FEMA Failures And Response To Trailers Contaminated By Formaldehyde.  “U.S. Senators Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Claire McCaskill (D-MO) and Barack Obama (D-IL) lauded Congress’ passage of their proposal to launch an investigation into reports that housing trailers contaminated with formaldehyde were provided to Hurricane Katrina victims. This provision, which is contained in the Omnibus Appropriations package soon to be signed into law, will initiate a long overdue investigation into why the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) failed to prevent the contamination or investigate the allegations.”  (Obama Press Release, 12/21/07; H.R. 2764, Became Public Law No: 110-161)

Obama Passed Legislation Prohibiting DHS From Entering Into Open-Ended, No-Bid Contracts For Emergency Response Activities. “Legislation authored by U.S. Senators Barack Obama (D-IL) and Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-OK) that will stop the abuse of no-bid contracting in the aftermath of a disaster was included in the final Department of Homeland Security funding bill likely to pass the Senate today. After Senate passage, the bill will go to the President’s desk to be signed into law…After Hurricane Katrina, the Federal Emergency Management Agency used emergency authority to enter into open-ended, no-bid contracts. What was meant to be temporary stop-gap authority ballooned into wasteful contracts that lasted many months and wasted significant federal resources. Obama and Coburn legislation will stop this practice by restricting the use of emergency contracting authority only to urgent needs in the immediate response to emergencies…On three separate occasions, Obama and Coburn have passed legislation in the Senate that would end no-bid contracting with Gulf Coast reconstruction funds. Legislation that would have specifically prohibited no-bid contracts with Gulf Coast reconstruction was stripped from a previously passed funding bill.”  (Obama Press Release, 9/29/06)

Obama Passed An Amendment Into Law Creating A National Family Locator System. In 2006, Obama passed an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2007 Homeland Security Appropriations Act that required the Department of Homeland Security to create a centralized family locator system through which family members can contact their lost loved ones during disasters.  The amendment, which was signed into law as part of the final version of the bill, was based on legislation Obama introduced immediately after Hurricane Katrina.  (SA 4573 as modified agreed to in Senate by Unanimous Consent, 7/13/06; H.R. 5441, Became Public Law No: 109-295; S. 1630, 109th Congress, Referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs)

WORKING FAMILIES

Obama And Hatch Passed Legislation To Protect Individuals’ Rights To Continue Donating To Charities And Religious Organizations During Bankruptcy. In 2006, Obama was an original cosponsor of a bill that protected individuals’ rights to continue donating to charities and religious organizations during bankruptcy proceedings. The Hatch-Obama bill responded to a court ruling that above-medium income debtors in Chapter 13 bankruptcy could not deduct charitable contributions, including religious contributions, from their payment plans. The ruling was based on an interpretation of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA). Hatch and Obama authored S. 4044 to ensure that all individuals in bankruptcy, no matter their income, would be able to continue giving to charity and their church. The bill passed the senate by unanimous consent and was signed by the president. (S. 4044, Signed 12/20/06, Became Public Law No. 109-439)

Suggested actions items:

1. Readers may wish to visit and bookmark this earlier fact check post on Obama’s record: Highlights of Obama’s Strong Record of Accomplishment in the U.S. and Illinois Senate, January 14, 2008 and this blog by a supporter of Obama: Obama’s Record.

2. I think it would be helpful to write a polite letter to NYT’s public editor Mr. Clark Hoyt and inform him about the fact check article along with some thoughtful remarks, and perhaps request him to take suitable corrective action about the Zernike and Zeleny article.


Clark Hoyt

E-mail: [email protected]

Website: Link

3. Please bookmark and frequently visit the Obama Fact Check page. The monthly archives (at the bottom of the fact check front page) are a useful source of information and rebuttals.

4. RSS feed for the fact check is here. Subscribing to it would be a useful way to keep tabs on the latest posts.

5. Please forward any links (and/or the diary link) that you find useful here to as many your friends, co-workers and family members as possible.

Thanks for reading and for taking action!

Update: To complement the posted fact check rebuttal.


Obama’s IL Senate work

From a previous NYT post (ironically).

During the first (8) eight years of his elected service he sponsored over 820 bills. He introduced:

233 regarding healthcare reform,

125 on poverty and public assistance,

112 crime fighting bills,

97 economic bills,

60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,

21 ethics reform bills,

15 gun control,

6 veterans affairs and many others.

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepa…

From my diary: Obama’s Record Reference (a partial compilation. Updated version to follow in a few days).

Note To Media: Ask John McCain About David Vitter

New York governor Eliot Spitzer has blown it in a big way. Anti-corruption crusaders ought not to be dallying with call girls. Ordinarily I don’t like to assign much importance to personal and/or family matters. But when a personal act is both illegal and hypocritical, it becomes a hurdle that is very difficult to get over.

That said, the media is demonstrating its customary tunnel-blindness in reporting this story. The news is less than two hours old and I have already heard reporters on CNN, Fox and MSNBC asking about the impact on Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

Why would this have any impact on Hillary Clinton’s campaign? It is unrelated to policy matters. It is not something she could have known. There is no connection to her whatsoever other than the fact that Spitzer had endorsed her.

Well, I haven’t heard anyone ask John McCain about whether he has the support of Sen. Larry “Wide Stance” Craig (R-ID). And Sen. David Vitter (R-LA), an admitted patron of Washington’s DC Madam endorsed McCain just yesterday. Neither Craig nor Vitter have resigned their seats in the Senate.

I also have to wonder if Dick Morris, a frequent guest on Bill O’Reilly’s program, and the subject of his own prostitution scandal, will appear on the Factor tonight to discuss the Spitzer affair. While he obviously would have no moral authority to criticize Spitzer, he could at least speak from experience. Knowing Morris and O’Reilly, they would probably not even bother to disclose it.

Here’s your homework for today: Anyone who reads or hears a reporter ask Clinton about Spitzer should demand that they also ask McCain about Vitter.

Lawsuit exposes Microsoft executives’ complaints about Vista

Anyone who has had to endure the incompatibility issues, bugs, and gaping holes in software should get a kick out of this New York Times article.

Here’s one story of a Vista upgrade early last year that did not go well. Jon, let’s call him, (bear with me – I’ll reveal his full identity later) upgrades two XP machines to Vista. Then he discovers that his printer, regular scanner and film scanner lack Vista drivers. He has to stick with XP on one machine just so he can continue to use the peripherals.

Did Jon simply have bad luck? Apparently not. When another person, Steven, hears about Jon’s woes, he says drivers are missing in every category – “this is the same across the whole ecosystem.”

Then there’s Mike, who buys a laptop that has a reassuring “Windows Vista Capable” logo affixed. He thinks that he will be able to run Vista in all of its glory, as well as favorite Microsoft programs like Movie Maker. His report: “I personally got burned.” His new laptop – logo or no logo – lacks the necessary graphics chip and can run neither his favorite video-editing software nor anything but a hobbled version of Vista. “I now have a $2,100 e-mail machine,” he says.

It turns out that Mike is clearly not a naïf. He’s Mike Nash, a Microsoft vice president who oversees Windows product management. And Jon, who is dismayed to learn that the drivers he needs don’t exist? That’s Jon A. Shirley, a Microsoft board member and former president and chief operating officer. And Steven, who reports that missing drivers are anything but exceptional, is in a good position to know: he’s Steven Sinofsky, the company’s senior vice president responsible for Windows.

Their remarks come from a stream of internal communications at Microsoft in February 2007, after Vista had been released as a supposedly finished product and customers were paying full retail price. Between the nonexistent drivers and PCs mislabeled as being ready for Vista when they really were not, Vista instantly acquired a reputation at birth: Does Not Play Well With Others.

So Microsoft execs have been caught acknowledging that they shoved a piece of shit operating system on the public, knowing full well that it was actually inferior to their last piece of shit operating system.  But it never would have happened, had somebody not been brave enough to sue Microsoft.  According to the article:

We usually do not have the opportunity to overhear Microsoft’s most senior executives vent their personal frustrations with Windows. But a lawsuit filed against Microsoft in March 2007 in United States District Court in Seattle has pried loose a packet of internal company documents. The plaintiffs, Dianne Kelley and Kenneth Hansen, bought PCs in late 2006, before Vista’s release, and contend that Microsoft’s “Windows Vista Capable” stickers were misleading when affixed to machines that turned out to be incapable of running the versions of Vista that offered the features Microsoft was marketing as distinctive Vista benefits.

Last month, Judge Marsha A. Pechman granted class-action status to the suit, which is scheduled to go to trial in October. (Microsoft last week appealed the certification decision.)

Given that one of the first actions as dictator by George W. Bush was to drop the anti-trust against Microsoft, I doubt this suit shall go anywhere this year.  But it has served at least one purpose: to expose the true thoughts of those who push inferior, and often-times, lethal products on consumers.

Carter Camp’s Indian Mascot Essay, “Mass Racial Taunting; America’s Weekend Sport”

Carter Camp gave me his permission to repost his essay entitled “Mass Racial Taunting; America’s Weekend Sport” in the comments of “Stereotypical Elements (that) appear… in Athletic Contests” posted at Native American Netroots. I had mentioned that I wanted to cite the Shadow Report as an introduction, so here’s what the Consolidated Indigenous Shadow Report says about Indian Mascots on page 72.


Although the United States would probably respond that racist mascots and logos are an exercise of free speech that it has reserved under the Convention, they reveal the depth and pervasiveness of the racism against Indigenous Peoples so deeply engrained in the history and psyche of the United States and the dominant culture.

And over the break is Carter Camp’s essay entitled “Mass Racial Taunting; America’s Weekend Sport,” which he wrote “several years ago when people in Tulsa were protesting the Union High redskins.”

Crossposted at Native American Netroots

MASS RACIAL TAUNTING; AMERICAS WEEKEND SPORT    

by Carter Camp, Ponca Nation

For thousands of people in America, Friday nights in the fall are for going to the High School football game.  On Saturday, college towns across America swell to double or triple their normal size as fans pour into town to cheer the local college football team.  On Sunday, Sunday evening, and Monday night, millions of Americans gather in stadiums, in bars, and in front of their televisions to see a great communal American pastime, professional football.  But did you ever stop to think that a great percentage of these same all-American people also will spend some of their time hurling racial epithets at my people? Every Friday, Saturday, and Sunday (and Monday night) millions of Americans will scream and beg for my Indian people to be scalped, chopped, burned, tomahawked and murdered, by the Indians, Savages, Redskins, and Braves across the field.  In the winter it moves inside for basketball and in the spring back outside for baseball, but every weekend all year around, one of Americas’ favorite things to do is to spend some time ignorantly portraying a stereotypical Indian person or spending a few hours mock-hating and degrading Indian people.  And when we Indians dare mention it is offensive, they argue they should keep on doing it because ‘they have done it for a long time’, longer ago than when they kept slaves or would not let women vote, so long that now it is a tradition! You see, in America even screaming racial epithets can become a cherished tradition that some people are willing to fight a civil war over.*

Not ‘racist’ epithets, the Americans who are screaming to kill, burn, and scalp us, don’t mean us really, they mean those people dressed as caricatures of our ancestors.  And they also do not mean to denigrate our religion because most of them do not even know we have religions and they all assume our culture is dead because they have been taught we were a “vanishing race”, so it must be ok to insult our Grandfathers dress, speech and hair.  They may not be ‘racist’ people but their ‘racial’ barbs are just as harmful to our children.

One of the things Americans like to tell us is not to be so sensitive, it is all done in good fun.  And perhaps it would be funny to us if the very things they scream to be done to the Indian mascot had not actually been done to our Grandfathers by theirs. I am one generation removed from the atrocity of the genocidal “Ponca removal”, my Grandfather and Grandmother survived the Ponca,” trail of tears” forced march to Oklahoma Territory in the late 1800’s, but one third of my Tribe perished.  What is ancient history to most Americans is still fresh in the minds of we Indian people, as close as Hitler’s holocaust is to a Jew and much closer than slavery is to a Black person.  I think it is too soon to ask us not to be sensitive, I still mourn my Grandparents and my people are still not whole.

When all else fails, mascotteers like to tell Indians they are really “honoring” us.  Even those who mean it sincerely must not have considered that there are two sides to every contest and one half of the people in the stadium are in no way seeking to “honor” the “redskins” they are about to “slaughter”.  There can be no way to honor Indian people by using their Tribe or race as team mascots because mascots become a part of the fray and to half of the people attending they are an enemy to be punished, mocked and defeated.  We would like it very much if Americans really did honor us as co-Americans who are worthy of the same respect you give all the other races.  Black, White and Yellow people are exempted from the great American weekend custom of mass racial taunting, is it too much to ask of our fellow citizens that we also receive such an exemption?

* Statistics: There are approximately 3,000 schools using Indian people as mascots. Each has four grades with aprox. 6 teams for each grade. Each team plays aprox. 10 games per year. This makes 720,000 games, and if each game has 500 people (stadiums have many thousands while soccer fields have few, 500 is an arbitrary but real number used to make my point), there are 360,000,000 Americans taking part in a given year. If one-half of them are in the opposition, we have the amazing statistic of 180 MILLION! Americans per year taking part in the Great-American-Weekend-Sport of “Mass Racial Taunting”! (MRT) of Indian people.   The other 180 million Americans think it is not a big thing. Warning: These statistics do not take into account the hundreds of millions of Americans joining the “MRT” of my people, at home, in front of their kids. CC

Four at Four

  1. The Guardian reports that the U.S. warned any economic ray of hope unlikely to brighten sluggish trend. “America’s economic downturn is likely to be “W-shaped” with the occasional ray of hope failing to shift a sluggish trend lasting throughout 2009, according to a gloomy forecast by HSBC. The bank’s economists say that a loss of confidence in the financial system is diminishing the impact of rate cuts by the Federal Reserve – and that US interest rates may fall as low as 1%… As the credit crunch bites into the banking system and consumer spending weakens, HSBC predicts that US growth will slow from last year’s 2.2% to 1.5% in 2008 and to 1.2% in 2009.”

    The Boston Globe adds Surging costs of groceries hit home. “American families, already pinched by soaring energy costs, are taking another big hit to household budgets as food prices increase at the fastest rate since 1990… Wholesale food prices, an indicator of where supermarket prices are headed, rose last month at the fastest rate since 2003, with egg prices jumping 60 percent from a year ago, pasta products 30 percent, and fruits and vegetables 20 percent, according to the Labor Department… Several factors contribute to higher food prices, analysts say, but none more than record prices for oil, which last week closed above $105 a barrel. Oil is not only driving up production and transportation costs, but also adding to demand for corn and soybeans, used to make alternative fuels such as ethanol and biodiesel… Meanwhile, with poor harvests in major wheat-producing regions, wheat prices have more than tripled.”

  2. The Los Angeles Times reports Senate panel critiques prewar claims by White House. “The Senate Intelligence Committee is preparing to release a detailed critique of the Bush administration’s claims in the buildup to war with Iraq… The findings are likely to be a source of political discomfort for the White House by reviving the controversy over the Bush administration’s case for war… The report could also become political fodder for the presidential race, which has focused on the differing positions of the remaining candidates on the decision to invade Iraq… Dissatisfied with the scope of the report, Republicans on the panel are expected to attach a section outlining their objections and calling attention to prewar claims by prominent Democrats, including [Sen. Hillary] Clinton.”

    And while Congress squabbles, The New York Times reports that Five American soldiers were killed in Baghdad and three others wounded by a bomb on Monday at about 3 p.m. in the Mansour neighnorhood. “The soldiers were on a dismounted patrol when they were attacked… Earlier Monday, one of the most important leaders of local Sunni Arab forces in Diyala Province, just north of Baghdad, who are working with the Americans against insurgents in Iraq, was killed by a female suicide bomber who blew herself up at his home. The leader of the neighborhood forces, Sheik Thaer al-Ghadhban al-Karkhy , was killed in the province, along with a child and a police guard, according to a police official.”

News about U.S. troops deployed to South Korea, polar bears, and CO2 is beneath the fold.

  1. The New York Times reports on a Plan to let families live with U.S. troops in Korea. “The commander of American forces in South Korea is urging the Pentagon to adopt a major change in deployment policies that for the first time would allow thousands of troops stationed there to bring spouses and children to live with them during tours of duty. The new proposal by the commander, Gen. B. B. Bell, is a recognition that the military must do more to improve the quality of life for troops – and their families – if it hopes to retain personnel despite extended deployments overseas during a time of two wars… About 90 percent of the 28,500 troops now deployed to South Korea are not authorized to bring families; most of those who can are among the more senior-level officers.”

  2. The Guardian reports U.S. government sued over failure to protect polar bears.

    The US government agency responsible for compiling the country’s list of endangered species will face a new legal challenge today over its failure to protect the polar bear.

    Environmental groups are set to sue the Bush administration in a federal court in California, claiming the Fish and Wildlife Service is now in breach of its own mandate.

    The FWS was due to have decided by January 9 whether to classify the polar bear as threatened due to climate change. This date itself was a full year after consultations began on the issue. But the service has said it is still reviewing technical data along with more than 670,000 comments on the issue.

    The FWS inspector general has announced a preliminary investigation into the delay to determine whether a full-fledged investigation is warranted.

    Environmental campaigners widely believe the decision is being held up by the Bush administration so it can complete sale of valuable oil and gas leases in coastal waters in Alaska – areas considered to be prime bear habitats.

  3. To repeat this morning’s news, the Washington Post reports Carbon output must near zero To avert danger.

    The task of cutting greenhouse gas emissions enough to avert a dangerous rise in global temperatures may be far more difficult than previous research suggested, say scientists who have just published studies indicating that it would require the world to cease carbon emissions altogether within a matter of decades.

    Their findings, published in separate journals over the past few weeks, suggest that both industrialized and developing nations must wean themselves off fossil fuels by as early as mid-century in order to prevent warming that could change precipitation patterns and dry up sources of water worldwide.

    Using advanced computer models to factor in deep-sea warming and other aspects of the carbon cycle that naturally creates and removes carbon dioxide (CO2), the scientists, from countries including the United States, Canada and Germany, are delivering a simple message: The world must bring carbon emissions down to near zero to keep temperatures from rising further.

The Government vs The People

Government is an umbrella word, of course. The government is made up of branches, departments and agencies etc. Each little part adding up to the edifice we know as  The Government. And each of these separate entities is made up of its own departments etc. And each of those are made up of …human beings. One of the great myths of American politics is that the government is some sort of impartial monolith. It’s not, it is in essence a bunch of yahoos just like me and you who go to work every day and play office politics and career politics and plot and scheme and make alliances and enemies for one real purpose behind it all….keeping that paycheck coming in every two weeks. Keeping the lights on, so to speak.

Photobucket

Then we go back up the chain…of purely human action and reaction! Each office in each department of each agency of each branch is made up of humans who have been successful at keeping their paycheck…and who have ‘won’ their office politics. Usually, to some extent, by kissing their immediate superiors ass, who kisses his superiors ass…ad infinitum. A pack system, in essence. With an ascending order of Alpha Dogs. Each of these ‘superiors’ has his or her pack, each has a territory to defend. Each entity or dept. spends a certain portion of its time and energy engaging in defensive or offensive pack behavior to gain power to be used in both self defense or increasing its power and influence. This behavior, which we are all familiar with to some extent, is exacerbated (from what I hear and can very easily believe) in a government setting because of a lack of accountability to The Bottom Line. The government is not going to go out of business if it doesn’t get enough widgets produced in the final quarter.

And so one way to look at our government is as a series of packs, each trying to help its own Alpha Dog survive in the Game of Power….lest they perish themselves.

Which brings us to my point, since having a point seems to be a fashionable thing to do in blogging…

NSA quietly expands domestic spying program, even as Congress balks

The budget for the NSA’s data-sifting effort is classified, but one official estimated it surpasses $1 billion. The FBI is requesting to nearly double the budget for the Digital Collection System in 2009, compared with last year, requesting $42 million. “Not only do demands for information continue to increase, but also the requirement to facilitate information sharing does,” says a budget justification document, noting an “expansion of electronic surveillance activity in frequency, sophistication, and linguistic needs.”

Please read, if you are so inclined!

You can also relate this dynamic to this story, to a certain extent… Iraq War To Cost Iraq War To Cost $12B A Month In 20082B A Month In 2008


Beyond 2008, working with “best-case” and “realistic-moderate” scenarios, they project the Iraq and Afghan wars, including long-term U.S. military occupations of those countries, will cost the U.S. budget between $1.7 trillion and $2.7 trillion — or more — by 2017.

Interest on money borrowed to pay those costs could alone add $816 billion to that bottom line, they said.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has done its own projections and comes in lower, forecasting a cumulative cost by 2017 of $1.2 trillion to $1.7 trillion for the two wars, with Iraq generally accounting for three-quarters of the costs.

…….as the pack at the Pentagon….or if you prefer a different analogy, the bureaucratic organism that is the Pentagon (which of course includes the Military/Congressional Industrial complex) seeks to increase its power…

And who does this expansion take place against? The People

Of course this phenomenon exists under Democratic Administrations too. The main difference seems to be that under Dems, the depts. etc. that are successful at this sort of unchecked expansion are things like HUD, or SCHIP, or regulatory agencies like the FDA and the EPA….that sort of thing. Whereas under the Warmonger Repubs…it is entities like the NSA, FBI and of course The Pentagon. The entities that have the ear of those in power tend to expand. Just one of the differences between the two parties. I would be remiss in not pointing out that it was forty years of expansion of government that led to The Republican Revolution in the nineties ending that 40 year reign of democrats in Congress. They were able to point to these expansions in horror…and The People bought it…and voted out the Dems and voted in the Repubs….so that they could expand the government in their horrifying way.

One of the basic functions of government is supposed to be limiting government expansion. Government oversight. This is in many ways, the government truly representing The People. “The Government” knows this, the goverment knows The People want to limit it….and so we end up, after a long circumnavigation….back at our title. Our reality has become on a very very deep level, The Government vs, The People. And right now….the Government is winning.

US Economy could fall casualty to Wars

Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph E. Stiglitz and co-author Linda J. Bilmes report in a new book that in 2008, its sixth year, the Iraq war will cost approximately $12 billion a month, triple the “burn” rate of its earliest years.

YIKES!  I can see where that might have an effect on our economy beyond the already trillions-of-dollars deficit we currently are dealing with.

From AP:

The flow of blood may be ebbing, but the flood of money into the Iraq war is steadily rising, new analyses show.

Actually, with the current amount of violence in Iraq beginning to climb once again, that statement might be incorrect in itself.  Anyway, back to the wars and the economy.

Beyond 2008, working with “best-case” and “realistic-moderate” scenarios, they project the Iraq and Afghan wars, including long-term U.S. military occupations of those countries, will cost the U.S. budget between $1.7 trillion and $2.7 trillion — or more — by 2017.

Interest on money borrowed to pay those costs could alone add $816 billion to that bottom line, they say.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has done its own projections and comes in lower, forecasting a cumulative cost by 2017 of $1.2 trillion to $1.7 trillion for the two wars, with Iraq generally accounting for three-quarters of the costs.

 

Let me see?  Who to believe, a Nobel Prize Winning economist or the Congressional Budget Office?  

Hmmmmm.  

I’ll leave that up to each of you individual readers, but after 7 years of the Bush Administration and their shoot straight rhetoric (HA!) I’m personally going with the Nobel Prize dude.

In their book, “The Three Trillion Dollar War,” Stiglitz, of Columbia University, and Bilmes, of Harvard, report the two wars will have cost the U.S. budget $845 billion in 2007 dollars by September 30, end of fiscal year 2008, assuming Congress fully funds Bush administration requests. That counts not just military operations, but embassy costs, reconstruction and other war-related expenses.

That total far surpasses the $670 billion in 2007 dollars the Congressional Research Service says was the U.S. price tag for the 12-year Vietnam War.

Then there is this further explanation:

The two economists say their calculations are conservative, because they don’t encompass many “hidden” items in the U.S. budget. Their basic projections also exclude the potentially huge debt-service cost — on which CBO approximately agrees — and the cost to the U.S. economy of global oil prices that have quadrupled since 2003, an increase analysts blame partly on the Iraq upheaval.

Estimating all economic and social costs might push the U.S. war bill up toward $5 trillion by 2017, they say.

Consider, for a moment, this amount of money injected into the US economy instead of Bush’s Folly.  

Healthcare for all Americans?  check

Complete solvency for Social Security?  check

R&D money for alternative fuels? check

Humanatarian aid to countries(Good PR)?  check

As I always say, I simply cannot wait until the adults take back our government.

Tina Brown needs to get a grip on reality.

So I just knew the whole “men hate hill” bullshit would come to a festering whitehead conclusion. Who knew it would be with the once-important Tina Brown. You might remember her from the 80s, maybe even the 90s. She use to run the elite of magazines, including Vanity Fair and the New Yorker. Now she goes where writing careers go to die, Newsweek.

Let’s see who was once one the most important talking heads has to say:

It’s a revolt that has been overdue for a while and has now found its focus in Clinton’s candidacy. In 1952, Ralph Ellison’s revelatory novel, “Invisible Man,” nailed the experience of being black in America. In the relentless youth culture of the early 21st century, if you are 50 and female, the novel that’s being written on your forehead every day is “Invisible Woman.” All over the country there are vigorous, independent, self-liberated boomer women-women who possess all the management skills that come from raising families while holding down demanding jobs, women who have experience, enterprise and, among the empty nesters, a little financial independence, yet still find themselves steadfastly dissed and ignored. Advertisers don’t want them. TV networks dump their older anchorwomen off the air. Hollywood studios refuse to write parts for them. Employers make it clear they’d prefer a “fresh (cheaper) face.”

You have got to be fucking kidding. I knew Hillary and her supporters love to get up on the cross and be the martyr, but the “Invisible Woman”? I am sure the moms of the ghettos feel the pain of “vigorous, independent, self-liberated boomer women”. I am sure all those civil rights activists from 50s and 60s love having their struggle co-opted by yet another wave of self-righteous boomers.

And what is with “Advertisers don’t want them”? Are you serious? Every bit of programming from 9 am to 5 pm is tailor-made for the demographic of boomers. And “TV networks dump their older anchorwomen off the air?” You mean like Tucker?

And to take Ralph Ellison incredible book, and bend and contort it to fit the victimhood boomer women need to feel, to feel validated, is beyond incredulous. It is borderline criminal, devaluating an entire people’s culture to score some cheap talking points.

But it’s so true, boomer women are constantly being told to sit on the back of the bus.

Boomer women are denied space at lunch counters.

Boomer women have crosses burned on their lawns.

Boomer women are forced to take service entrances to their jobs.

Boomer women are treated like second class citizens under Jim Crow.

Boomer women face off with the KKK and Dixiecrats who try to use threat of death and violence to keep them from the polls.

Boomer women are constantly feed into a self-fulfilling cycle of broken promises and apartheid.

Poor, poor boomer women, when will the world truly understand your pain, and how it trumps that of the African-American experience over the last 300 years?

Like Oprah’s people!

Even Oprah abandoned them when she opted for Obama. Am I alone in suspecting that TV’s most powerful 54-year-old woman just might have endorsed him so fast for reasons of desirable viewer demographics as much as personal inspiration? Certainly, no TV diva in her 50s who values her ratings wants to be defined by the hot-flash cohort.

This is what happens to other women, especially those of a certain skin persuasion, who do not follow around white boomer women like a good mammy following Ms. Scarlett around the house helping her get ready for the big plantation dance.

I guess for Brown and Hill, good work is so hard to find these days. Why you could say the help are “invisible women”, just the way boomers like it. Except of course, when there is a dance on.

 

Load more