You are currently browsing the daily archive for December 16, 2009.
Two stories I read today clashed interestingly:
one, about Citi Group’s tax exemption
U.S. gave up billions in tax money in deal for Citigroup’s bailout repayment
While the Obama administration has said taxpayers are likely to profit from the sale of the Citigroup shares, accounting experts said the lost tax revenue could easily outstrip those profits.
And then, on the other hand, Main Street is supposed to pick that slack
Obama weighs creating commission to propose tax hikes, spending cuts
President Obama is seriously considering an executive order to create a bipartisan commission that could weigh sweeping tax increases and spending cuts to try to slash the soaring federal deficit, CNN has learned.
this is what they are cutting
Officials say that some inside the administration are pushing for a narrow mandate because it’s too complicated to tackle reform of the tax system and possible spending cuts to various popular programs such as Social Security and Medicare all at once.
“I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of fat cat bankers on Wall Street”
was not so much hypocrisy as a Freudian slip. Who exactly footed 1 billion for his installation?
It’s not like he didn’t tell us in his campaign whom he really admired
Finally, in all the progressives wrath at Holly Joe, a voice of reason
Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), among the most vocal supporters of the public option, said it would be unfair to blame Lieberman for its apparent demise. Feingold said that responsibility ultimately rests with President Barack Obama and he could have insisted on a higher standard for the legislation.
But then we know whose standard Obama pushed
Insurers oppose the creation of a Medicare-style public insurance option,
The insurers also do not support an employer mandate.
Insurers would agree to stop denying coverage to people because of pre-existing conditions as long as all individuals were required by law to buy insurance.
To help make coverage affordable to middle class people, particularly the self-employed and those who work for small businesses, the government would give refundable tax credits on a sliding scale, according to income
Lieberman just happens to be a co-worker of Obama, for the same masters. A much better co-worker – employee of the month to Obama’s slacker, but a mere colleague nevertheless. So Feingold finally lets the cat out of the bag, for those who lived in a cave (or are B0bots)
“This bill appears to be legislation that the president wanted in the first place, so I don’t think focusing it on Lieberman really hits the truth,” said Feingold. “I think they could have been higher. I certainly think a stronger bill would have been better in every respect.”
Of course, some B0bots are still desperately clinging to…blaming Bill and Hillary
“if obama did`t want this bill he would have told reid to kill it. this is another hillary and bill clinton failure.”
Meanwhile I think I am finally starting to understand what Obama meant by “moral imagination” in his Nobel speech.
contrary to Obama’s occasional public statements in support of a public option, the White House clearly intended from the start that the final health care reform bill would contain no such provision and was actively and privately participating in efforts to shape a final bill without it. From the start, assuaging the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries was a central preoccupation of the White House — hence the deal negotiated in strict secrecy with Pharma