It is not good news for America when the White House official in charge setting purchasing policy for the entire government, David Safavian, is indicted for corruption and blocking a criminal investigation.

It is certainly not good news for the world to hear that more than 30% of the Arctic ice caps have melted in the past 10 years.

But if these news stories of the last several weeks are an indication that the national press corps and Americans in general are emerging from a painfully long hibernation THAT is a good sign.

If you are concerned that American citizens are not getting the true story of what is happening here and abroad-

If you are concerned about the direction that the country has taken in the last five years under the Bush administration -

Come to the next South Haven Area Democratic Club and meet people who share your concerns. You do not have to be a member of the Democratic Party to attend.

Together we can create the change we long to see in the world!

Next meeting Tuesday October 25 at 7:00 PM at the Warren Senior Center on Williams Street in South Haven.

http://www.freedomunderground.org/memoryhole/pentagon.php#Main

Meet the Candidates for South Haven City Council

Tuesday, June 28

7:00 PM

Lake Michigan College
South Haven

South Haven voters are invited to meet the candidates for City Council and Mayor.
Candidates will introduce themselves to voters and answer questions
about their campaign platform and their visions and goals for South Haven.

Sponsored by the South Haven Area Democratic Club

Editor,

Well, the meeting is over, the vote is in, and height restrictions were waived for the 815 E. Wells project in South Haven. I feel I must make a comment regarding the petitions opposing the height and density of this project that were signed by approximately 600 people. Here is exactly what was atop each page of the petition:
"We, the undersigned citizens of South Haven, are concerned about the drastic increase in the building height and density being considered for the Schlack Condominium Development on the Black River and the former Bohn Building on Huron and Kalamazoo Street.

"We believe that the Planning Commission and City Council should not grant waivers or variances of height and density on such a large scale. Changes to the essential character of the city should not be made without careful study, citizen input, and, if appropriate, amendments to the zoning ordinance."

All commission members were given a copy of the signed petition, and it was noted in the council proceedings. I want to defend the integrity and intelligence of each person who both signed and/or circulated the petition. Although the heading of each petition was worded as above, and each person who signed could read the heading, some council members discounted its importance. In particular, Ms. Fahs, representing the 1st Ward, found it "confusing," "troubling," and "difficult." She implied that the person asking for the signature or circulating the petition didn't explain it correctly. Quoting Ms. Fahs: "I feel like it matters, if who was asking for the signature is making a presentation that kind of leads one way or the other, and that if someone else made a presentation we might get a different result." So where is the petition with 600 signatures that approves and promotes these heights?

I would like to think that we have a citizenry that is intelligent enough and literate enough to not just sign anything that someone presents. The petition was calling for careful study and citizen input. Is that extreme and hard to support?

The question is - how should we communicate with our elected city officials? What would they suggest? If you signed or circulated the petition, it might be helpful to write or call your council member, who did not take that signature into account, and state that you did know what you were signing, you did not cajole others into signing, and you would like to have a voice. How would they suggest you make yourself heard?

Pat Gaston

You really have to see this good work by the DCCC. Type in your State Name to see how your legislator has gone all the way with "The Bug Man of Alcatraz" Tom Delay!

Want to take any bets on Mr. Upton?

So, I believe I'll start posting them. Or links to real blogs where you can find them.

Here is an entry from The LeftCoaster - from April 14.

The list of names appears below the fold. And here's the quotable quote:

"Take a look at how many of these names also showed up on the list of those Democrats who voted for the estate tax repeal yesterday, and then wonder what the hell happened to the party. And then tell Rahm Emmanuel that none of these bastards deserve DCCC money next year.

They can get it from the ABA and MBNA instead."

73 Democrats voted against consumers and with MBNA and the ABA on this.

73.

What has happened to the Democratic Party when 42 Representatives can vote for wealthy people and against Social Security yesterday and nearly twice that many can vote against consumers today? I have noted by way of an asterisk (*) those House Democrats that voted yesterday for repealing the estate tax and then today voted against consumers on the bankruptcy bill. May they all have primary challengers next year.

As a result, I have added a new category to the blog called "Democratic Outrages."

The following House Dems voted against consumers this afternoon:

Andrews
Baca
Baird
Bean*
Berry*
Bishop (GA)*
Boren*
Boswell*
Boucher*
Boyd
Cardoza*
Case
Chandler*
Cleaver
Cooper
Costa*
Cramer*
Crowley
Cuellar*
Davis (AL)
Davis (FL)
Davis (TN)*
Edwards*
Etheridge
Ford
Gonzalez
Gordon*
Green, Al
Harman
Herseth
Higgins
Hinojosa*
Holden
Hooley*
Hoyer
Israel*
Jefferson*
Kind
Larsen (WA)*
Matheson*
McCarthy*
McIntyre*
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon*
Menendez
Michaud
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Ortiz
Pastor
Peterson (MN)*
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall*
Reyes
Ross*
Rothman
Ruppersberger*
Salazar*
Schwartz (PA)
Scott (GA)*
Skelton*
Spratt
Strickland
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor (MS)
Thompson (CA)
Wu
Wynn*

Van Buren County Democrats are Hosting several PUBLIC FORUMS throughout the county.

The next scheduled forum will be held in South Haven, and

WE HOPE YOU'LL BE THERE!

UPCOMING FORUM

WHEN: Wednesday, April 20th

WHERE: LMC's South Haven campus - conference room SH141

6:00 PM - - -ESSAY AWARDS*

7:00 PM - - -SSA SPEAKER Vonda Van Til (Grand Rapids, MI)

7:30 PM - - -NCPSSM SPEAKER** Jan Witt (Washington, D.C.)

*Students are invited to submit an essay on SS.
Essay Topic: Privatization is not a "good deal" for young Americans because. . .

If you know a student writer(high school or older - part or full-time), please pass the word!

Cash awards will be presented in the amounts of:

1st- $125.00

2nd- $ 75.00

Non-cash awards will be presented to participants!

Essays should be submitted by April 18th to:

Essay
c/o SHADC
P.O. Box 461
South Haven, MI 49090

**National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare

Highly Recommended Sources of Information for the Anti-Social Security Phase-Out Crowd
Talking Points Memo
National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare
Economic Policy Institute
Center for Economic and Policy Research
The Century Foundation

By Molly Ivins, AlterNet

http://www.alternet.org/story/21402/

The bankruptcy bill was a gift to big bankers and credit card companies to begin with, in return for copious showers of campaign contributions to our very own elected representatives in Congress. Same old, same old.

The big lenders, the kind who can legally jack up your interest rates at any time for any reason (read that fine print, folks), have a problem. More and more Americans are going broke. So they declare bankruptcy under Chapter 7, which wipes out their credit for 10 years, but gives them a chance to start over without debt. So, naturally, the banks want to make it harder to declare bankruptcy by forcing people to file under Chapter 13, only a partial diminution of debt.

According to a study by two associate medical professors at Harvard, published in Health Affairs, bankruptcies are indeed shooting up. Between 1981 and 2001, personal bankruptcies rose by 360 percent, but those caused by medical debts rose an astronomical 2,200 percent. Only job loss now slightly leads medical crisis as the reason for bankruptcy – it's ahead of divorce.

Another cause, as well the usual usury, is that the card companies push accounts on people whose credit is only marginal – your teenager has doubtlessly been offered several. Ooops, it turns out many of those with shaky credit can't pay (!), so of course the banks want the law changed even more in their favor. Poor little card companies – only $30 billion in profits last year.

If you have not lived long enough to know that anyone can be hit by financial catastrophe, just wait. Your job, too, can be outsourced. And if you think health insurance can keep you out of financial trouble if you get sick – surprise! Three-fourths of those who filed for bankruptcy because of medical costs had health insurance.

The study in Health Affairs reports that the middle class actually suffers most from the health crisis, accounting for 90 percent of all medical bankruptcies: Drug costs alone drive many into bankruptcy.

In a classic example of moral accounting, Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, the bill's chief sponsor, said, "People who have the ability to repay some or all of their debt should not be able to use bankruptcy as a financial planning tool so they get out of paying their debt scot-free, while honest Americans who play by the rules have to foot the bill."

That's a startling example of the "straw-man" school of argument. The study by the Harvard profs shows that in the two years before filing for bankruptcy, 19 percent of families went without food, 40 percent had their phone service shut off, 43 percent could not fill a doctor's prescription and 53 percent went without important medical care.

So, who are these feckless, irresponsible moochers using bankruptcy to avoid paying legitimate debts? Why, look at this: The New York Times reports "legal specialists say the proposed law leaves open an increasingly popular loophole that lets wealthy people protect substantial assets from creditors even after filing for bankruptcy."

What, our Republican Congress passing a bill that favors rich people at the expense of "honest Americans who play by the rules and have to foot the bill"? If you have a lot of money (most people filing for bankruptcy don't have this problem), you just put it in an asset protection trust and walk away. You don't even have to set up the trust offshore anymore – five states have made it legal to set them up in their borders, and you don't even have to live in any of the five to do it.

If you don't like that feature of the bankruptcy bill, try this one: You may have read of the hardship on the families of those who have been called to fight in Iraq, including, of course, severe financial stress leading to many bankruptcies. Democrats in the Senate tried to put an amendment on this bill exempting military personnel, and the Republicans voted it down.

Elizabeth Warren, a Harvard law professor, pointed out in testimony before Congress that the bill assumes everyone is in bankruptcy because they're spendthrifts. "A family driven to bankruptcy by the increased cost of caring for an elderly parent with Alzheimer's disease is treated the same as someone who maxed out his credit cards at a casino. A person who had a heart attack is treated the same as someone who had a spending spree at the shopping mall. A mother who works two jobs and who cannot manage the prescription drugs needed for a child with diabetes is treated the same as someone who charged a bunch of credit cards with only a vague intent to repay."

But hey, that's the conservative idea of justice – treat 'em all the same, except for the rich.

© 2005 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/21402/

We don't have many young readers or members - so it may be instructive - and heartening - to take a look at what Rock The Vote is up to.

The adventurous can receive RTV email alerts/updates by signing up (no birth date required).

What fun.

Note how skillfully RTV links the VA legislature's proposed ban on low-hanging trowsers to the Social Security phase-out proposal.

A recent poll sponsored by Rock the Vote, AARP and the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies found that most Americans support repairing the current system, not replacing it with a privatized system. It further shows that young voters (18 to 39 yrs old), like most Americans, like private accounts but not if it means large cuts in Social Security benefits or massive government borrowing. Of course, those are the "little details" of private accounts plans that you never hear about.

This new poll is noteworthy - not just because we co-sponsored it - since the President is trying to win public backing from his plan, and especially from you - young people.

A recent Newsweek article detailing our campaign noted that in a Newsweek poll 75% of voters under 35 believe we are facing a Social Security "crisis." But even though young people are afraid that they will not receive full benefits if something is not done, a whopping 73 percent of young voters want government protection should a privatized plan prove unsucessful.

Unfortunately, with Social Security, like anything else, you cannot have your cake and eat it too.

With Social Security, you get a foundation of security to protect you while you try to invest for success with your 401(k)s and IRAs. Without Social Security, you're on your own, and there's no going back.

The numbers show, Americans - young and old alike - are worried that private accounts plans that cause large cuts in Social Security benefits will not ensure security for our generation.

There is so much inter-generational harmony in the air, maybe we an even get those Old White Men in the Virginia legislature to lay off their proposal to criminalize wearing low slung pants that show underwear. We love it when politicians try to legislate fashion. They're so in the know.

Come on Virginia, hiphop fashion is the wave of the future. Stop staring at that little piece of lace protruding from the low cut Levis on those UVA co-eds.

Update: Word is that the Virginia Senate has dropped the plan... See! They can't mess with us.

:: posted by RTV Street Report @ 2:49 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wednesday, February 02, 2005

Is this what he meant by “fuzzy math?”

From Dennis Baer of "Boycott AARP" (soon to be renamed)

Please pass this on to other people.

Join the revolution for progressive legislation

http://www.boycott-republicans.com

Write this url on your one, five and ten dollar bills.

http://www.Buyblue.org

http://www.2005blue.com

http://www.choosetheblue.com

http://www.imblue.net

http://www.boycott-republicans.com

Write this url on your one, five and ten dollar bills.

Call Eckerd Pharmacy Corporate Headquarters at 800 325 3737, Call CVS Pharmacy Corporate headquarters at 888 607 4287 and Call Walgreens Pharmacy Corporate headquarters at 800 289 2273 and tell them you will not purchase any products from their drug stores until they get the Republican congress to repeal the faulty prescription drug benefit and replace it with a simple 80 percent coverage benefit under Medicare Part B. Then sign the petition.

Call Walmart at 800 WALMART and tell them you will not buy from them until they get the Republican congress to stop social security privatization, increase the minimum wage to TEN dollars an hour, and extend unemployment insurance for people who lost jobs and sought work for more than 6 months.

The best part of this agreement is where you'll find it outlined - at the Barbara Boxer for President Blog.

Here's "The Great Omelet" on the matter of John McCain's vote to confirm Alberto Gonzalez.

*And other "Righteous Gentiles"

There was nothing surprising about last week's confirmation of Alberto Gonzales except for the tepidness of those who opposed it. Indeed, it appears that there is greater support for a pro-torture attorney general in the United States Senate than there is for Social Security privatization. And why shouldn't there be? As an institution, Social Security has lasted for generations, while torture has been with us for millennia. The nation has weighed its brief anti-torture past and its pro-torture future and has chosen, and moved on. As a wise man or sociopath has recently said, "The debate is over... the issue is dying out.".

The debate is certainly over for John McCain, Congress's resident expert on torture. Some might call McCain a partisan hypocrite who has cheapened the memory of his five grueling years in a Viet Cong torture camp with a proxy vote for genital electrocution and glowstick rape. But these people entirely miss the point: John McCain's vote wasn't the moral resignation of a partisan hack, but a staunch, no-nonsense advocacy of the administration's torture policy based on his own experience. That is, John McCain has declared that torture is justifiable because his own torture was justifiable.

The Viet Cong, after all, were fighting a new kind of enemy in a new kind of war, and John McCain was that enemy - and an enemy possibly possessing valuable information. Could he know when or where villages or cities were about to be bombed, information that could save hundreds, even thousands of lives? If so, who wouldn't agree to beat him repeatedly, deprive him of sleep, and tie his arms and legs into "stress positions" to find out? Who among us wouldn't torture John McCain to stop a ticking bomb?

"But what of the Geneva Conventions?" you may ask. Ah, but the Viet Cong realized how obsolete these thirty-year-old treaties had become. This was a new enemy, one that disregarded such naive "laws of war" as the binary division between civilians and soldiers. In the strange new conflicts of the twentieth century, where guerilla warfare met carpet bombing, napalm, and free-fire zones, the Geneva Conventions seem charmingly quaint to one as enlightened as the Medium Lobster, as they must have to the bodhisattva who woke McCain up by beating him bloody every day, and as they must now to Senator McCain, who has yielded to the higher wisdom of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

That John McCain was ultimately beaten, broken, abused, and violated for nothing is regrettable, but understandable... as regrettable and understandable as the old men and boys rounded up in villagewide sweeps on the way to Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay. But to make an omelet, one must break eggs, and war, after all, is the biggest fucking omelet there is. We have a lot more eggs to break, and it's good to see the senator join the rest of us while the kitchen burns down.
posted by Medium Lobster at 12:47 PM Comment (1)

You may think Fafblog isn't for you.

But only if you haven't actually READ Fafblog.

From the Fafblog Research Institute

If you don't laugh out loud . . . You haven't been paying attention! :>)

Social Security: it is in a crisis! But how bad is the crisis, and how can it be solved? Here at the Fafblog Research Institute we've compiled a handy FAQ to tell you what's what.

Q: Is Social Security in crisis?

A: Yes it is! And if we don’t do something right now it is going to EXPLODE!

Q: Oh no!

A: In forty years.

Q: Then what happens?

A: Then Social Security runs out of money! That means either your benefits are reduced, or all Social Security everywhere explodes in a giant fireball and we will have to run away from the fireball and jump away from it in slow motion to escape!

Q: Tell me more about this crisis in gritty detail!

A: The fireball is huge and loud and expensive and there is grinding guitar music on the soundtrack informing everyone that we are bad, bad dudes! The radiation turns all old people into very poor mutants who must scavenge and eat each other for food. Eventually the robots come: they are unstoppable. What has science done!

Q: I’m scared! How can we avert this terrible future?

A: There’s just one chance! We have to borrow trillions of dollars to finance transforming Social Security into a completely different system based on mandatory investments in preferred stocks.

Q: If we’re borrowing trillions of dollars, and the government already owes trillions of dollars, and the Social Security crisis is a debt problem anyway, how does this help Social Security?

A: Quick we have to act fast! We only have twenty years to go!

Q: I thought we had forty years.

A: Now we have ten! It is a ticking bomb.

Q: Oh no! In these extreme circumstances we have to privatize Social Security!

A: If we don't, the terrorists win.

Q: I’ll hold it down. You get the electrodes!

A: It’s so crazy, it just might work!

Q: I’m following you so far, but what if privatization…

A: It’s not privatization it is private accounts.

Q: Alright then, what if these private accounts…

A: They are not private accounts they are personal accounts.

Q: Okay, if these personal accounts…

A: They are not personal accounts, they are privamatupilous splendiferacy.
Q: I forgot what I was talking about.

A: Oh good! Have a lollipop with your splendiferacy.

Q: Can I see your Social Security plan?

A: No you can’t.

Q: Well, I’d really like to, before I decide to…

A: Would you really like to see the plan? Would you really, really?

Q: Yes yes I would I would, ever so much!

A: Okay then! When you go to bed tonight dreaming of private investment accounts a maaaaagical train will pull up to your window, and a maaaaagical conductor will let you on board…

Q: Oh boy!

A: And the maaaaagical train will take you to the North Pole to see Social Security Santa with your very own eyes so you can believe.

Q: Oh wow, I’d love that!

A: And he and his elves will give you your own private account which will last forever and ever. Would you like that?

Q: Yes I would, I would!

A: Well, you won’t get it, ‘cause you didn’t believe on your own!

Q: Oh no!

A: Get thee behind us! No Social Security for you!

Q: I ended up with crap stocks, and my private account went empty early. What do I do?

A: You run out of money and starve. But you’ll starve in freedom, because you OWN your empty personal account, which means you OWN your starvation!

Q: I feel so free and hungry!

A: A wise man once said it is better to live in freedom than to die in slavery … the slavery of a secure retirement.

Q: Give me liberty AND death!

A: That’s the spirit!

Q: Wheeee! *hack hack wheeze*