WELCOME TO OPINIONS BASED ON FACTS (OBOF)
&
THINGS YOU
MAY HAVE MISSED (TYMHM)
YEAR THREE
|
Name
|
Published
|
|
OVERVIEW
|
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 14
|
Dec 18, 2012
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 15
|
Jan. 02, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 16
|
Jan. 08, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 16
EXTRA
|
Jan. 11, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 17
|
Jan. 15, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 18
|
Jan. 22, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 19
|
Jan. 29, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 20
|
Feb. 05, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 21
|
Feb. 14, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 22
|
Feb. 20, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 23
|
Feb. 27, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 23 SPECIAL
|
Mar. 06, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 24
|
Mar. 07, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 25
|
Mar. 12, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 25-EXTRA
|
Mar. 14, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 26
|
Mar. 19, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 27
|
Mar. 26, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 28
|
Apr. 02, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 29
|
Apr. 08, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 30
|
Apr. 17, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 31
|
Apr. 23, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 32
|
Apr. 30, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 33
|
May 07, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 34
|
May 18, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 35
|
May 21, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 36
|
May 30, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 37
|
June
05, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 38
|
June
11, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 39
|
June
18, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 40
|
June
25, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 41
|
July
02, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 42
|
July
09, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 43
|
July
16, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 44
|
July
23, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 45
|
July 30, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 46
|
Aug.
06, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 47
|
Aug.
14, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 48
|
Aug. 20, 2013
|
|
OBOF & TYMHM PART 49
|
Aug. 27, 2013
|
IN THIS ISSUE
1. Opening comments.
2. Don't get complacent about Social Security.
3. The Free-Trade Job-Loss Express.
4. Will the High Court widen the flood of money?
5. The New York Times Stunner.
6. Democrat Friends.
7. Putting workers on TV.
OPENING COMMENTS.
Come September 9, 2013, we, as a
country, will move into a crisis time.
The Republicans are saying that they will go so far as to shut down the
Government if they can't get rid of Obamacare, either by repeal or by not
funding it. Representative Boehner,
Speaker of the House, has said "There is going to be a Whale of a Fight." From what the President has said, there is
going to be any fight at all.
The President has said that he will
not let the Affordable Care Act be held hostage. On Tuesday August 27, 2013, he said, in a
very stern manner, "I will not negotiate with the Republicans in Congress
about the debit ceiling. The Governments
bills are going to be paid." I
really believe that this time around he will stick to it and use Amendment 14,
if necessary. He is not going to let it
be said that for the first time in history the Government was shut down on his
watch. He just isn't going to let that
happen and he is not going to let anything happen to sidetrack his greatest
accomplishment, The Affordable Care Act.
~~~
Don’t
Get Complacent About Social Security.
They Still
Want to Cut It.
Richard (RJ) Eskow
Campaign for America’s Future / Op-Ed
Published: Tuesday 20 August 2013
In every successful struggle there’s a time to celebrate
a hard-fought victory. When it comes to
Social Security, this is not that time.
It’s true that, after including the “chained CPI” benefit
cut in his latest budget, President Obama seems to have dropped the idea. And
it’s true there’s no talk of a “grand bargain” on the horizon. But it
would still be a serious mistake to become complacent about Social Security.
Even now, in the August heat and summer doldrums, there
are stirrings which suggest a deal could be on the way. Washington
If you, like most Americans, expect to depend on Social
Security, now would be a good time to get worried – and get active. If you’re a
Democrat who cares about the political fate of your party, complacency about
Social Security would be an even bigger mistake. The president’s misguided notions about a
Social Security deal may well have cost Democrats the House in 2010.
The Senate could be the next to fall.
But while there are troubling signs on the horizon, there
are also very promising ones. We’ll
start with the bad news.
Troubling
Signs
The president’s willing to cut benefits.
Once again the president has wisely shifted his rhetoric
from deficit reduction from job creation. Would he still cut Social Security, wounding
one of his party’s signature achievements and dealing a harsh blow to its
electoral chances?
He’s certainly been willing to do it before. One of
his first executive acts was the creation of a “deficit commission” led by two
rabid anti-Social Security activists, Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson. Social Security was included in their mandate
even though it’s forbidden by law from adding to the deficit. And a very
senior Cabinet official told this writer and other journalists early in the
Obama presidency that the Administration intended to push for Social Security
cuts.
And remember: These moves were made when Democrats held
the White House, the Senate, and Congress.
The President was
also planning to announce unilateral cuts to Social Security in his 2011 State
of the Union message until, as the Wall Street Journal reported, he was pressured to back down at the
last minute. And he continues to push for these cuts in
negotiations with the Republicans.
The Republicans are calling for them.
The Republicans
shrewdly – and predictably – moved to the left of the president with
a “Seniors’ Bill of Rights” in 2010, after he publicly discussed cuts. His equivocation on Social Security probably
helped them win the House. (We reviewed the polling data here.)
They’re using the
same playbook again this year. (We expected that, but miscalculated the length
of time it would take them to outflank him on this issue: It took 15 minutes.)
But
now that the posturing’s done, the horse trading has begun. They won’t play
their “Republicans for Social Security” card until election time. Now they’re sending their signals, luring the
Democrats into a trap.
“You want sequester
relief?” said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell in July. “Then let’s talk about a reduction in
entitlement spending,” And House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said earlier this month that “what we need to
have happen is leadership on the part of this president and the White House to
… say we’re going to fix the underlying problem that’s driving our deficit …
the entitlement programs and the unfunded liability that they are leaving on
this generation and the next.”
In other words: You first, Mr. President.
Conservatives still don’t understand fiscal policy.
Cantor’s completely wrong. (No shocker there.) Social Security is funded
separately and must be entirely self-sustaining through the payroll taxes
earmarked for its use. This separate
accounting is what has allowed anti-government advocates to create a false
sense of hysteria about potential shortfalls (not “bankruptcy”) two or
more decades from now.
Now clueless
conservatives are backing the president’s misguided “chained CPI” cut, echoing
the argument that Social Security’s inflation calculations are too high.
(They’re too low, at least for seniors.) When they combine this with their hostility
for the Fed’s “quantitative easing” they’re also, as Paul Krugman points out, arguing that
actual inflation is simultaneously both higher and lower than current figures
suggest.
Krugman couldn’t resist throwing in a “Schrödinger”
reference, referring to the physicist whose famous thought experiment involved
a cat which was both alive and dead at the same time – which is also the current
state of most Americans’ retirement security. Republicans can’t be reasoned
with based on facts – but politically they’re as shrewd as they come.
The politics are disastrous.
If losing the House wasn’t
enough for Democrats, a benefit-cutting “grand bargain” should finish the job.
As Derek Thompson noted in April, the
president’s budget cuts both Social Security and Medicare far more than the
Republicans’ did. In fact, the GOP’s Ryan budget didn’t cut Social Security at
all, and its radical dismantling of Medicare wasn’t scheduled to begin until
2023.
“Crazy Republicans,” said some Democratic cheerleaders,
“We’ve given them way more than they even asked for!”
Yeah, crazy all right – like a fox. (Or a Fox Network.) This kind of deal would give them something
they’ve always wanted, and let them blame it on the Democrats.
But the news isn’t all bad. There are some promising signs on the horizon,
too, and they give us even more reason to seize this moment on behalf of Social
Security.
Good
News
Activists are mobilized against cuts.
Activists remain
heavily mobilized against Social Security cuts. Progressive groups
collected over two million signatures opposing them.
Tens of thousands of people signed an
anti-cut “birthday card” to Social Security last week on the
78th anniversary of its creation.
They’re also
bringing the struggle to the politicians whose support will be needed to
protect the program. The Progressive
Congressional Campaign Committee (PCCC) ran a TV ad in Kentucky
MoveOn is
fundraising for two Democratic candidates based on their unequivocal opposition
to a “grand bargain” with cuts. It has
labeled the two, Brian Schatz for Senate and Mike Honda for Congress, “champions of Social Security.” MoveOn specifically says that it’s backing the
two in part because they “helped lead the fight to protect Social Security.”
If there’s one thing politicians understand, it’s being
rewarded with campaign cash for taking the right position – or punished, as the
PCCC is doing, for taking the wrong one.
Activism works.
And activism works.
In its story about the president’s aborted plan
to offer Social Security cuts in his 2011 State of the Union address, the Wall
Street Journal also explained why it didn’t happen: “The decision to hold
off was made as the White House came under pressure from Democrats and liberal
interest groups who oppose any cuts to Social Security benefits.”
Those groups were representing the view of a majority of
Americans across the political spectrum. For some publications the American people are
nothing more than an “interest group.”
The public hates Social Security cuts and wants
to expand it instead.
Speaking of the
people: You can’t swing a dead
Schrödinger’s cat nowadays without hitting a citizen who’s against benefit cuts.
Members of Congress returning home this summer faced public pushback to potential cuts,
including that of a woman who broke down and wept in a town hall meeting with
Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa
A recent poll by the National Academy
That position was supported by Americans all across the
political spectrum, including 74 percent of Republicans.
More politicians are signing on to the pro-Social
Security team.
Probably as a
result, politicians are getting the message.
The “Grayson/Takano letter,” by Reps. Alan
Grayson, D-Fla., and Mark Takano, D-Calif., calls on members of Congress to
pledge that they’ll vote against any budget that contains cuts to Social
Security.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, unlike
House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, has been unequivocal so far in
his opposition to cuts.
Sens. Tom Harkin, Mark Begich and Bernie Sanders have
each introduced bills to protect and strengthen Social Security.
And more
politicians are signing on every day.
Republicans are still crazy.
Congressional Republicans are still so extreme and
disorganized that it’s not clear they can get it together to
accept any bargain, “grand” or otherwise.
So there’s that.
You can do something about it.
You can sign this petition to show your support for the
Grayson/Takano letter.
(Nearly 300,000 people already have.) You can
sign the “Social Security birthday card.” You can write to your elected officials in
Congress and the White House, and you can stay informed on this issue.
Social Security needs to be expanded, not cut. Support
for expanding it, once considered a “fringe” position, is growing. Now senators
are publicly supporting it, polls show it’s the popular position, and op-eds
sing its praises.
So can you. There
will be plenty of opportunities to support the effort in the weeks and months
to come. But whatever you do, don’t get
complacent. There will be time to relax – and celebrate – after Social
Security’s been protected and expanded.
~~~
The
Free-Trade Job-Loss Express
is Coming Straight at Us.
Dave Johnson
Campaign for America’s Future / Op-Ed
Published: Sunday 18 August 2013
NOTE FROM FLOYD:
This item was first reported to you on
June 18, 2013 Part 39 & June 25, 2013, Part 40. This can be a real problem if it gets on Fast
Track. I, personally, think that it should
be slowed down and for Congress to have time to look at it and make amendments,
if needed and I think there are some needed.
I am going to re-list my comments from
Parts 39 and 40. After you read them and
the article below, you can go back to those two postings, if you desire, and
see what they have to say which will bring you up to date and the following
article.
~
The following is from
my comments
Posteding 39, June 18, 2013
Thoughts from FLOYD:
Last week I posted an article Corporations are
Colonizing Us with Trade Deals, and Wall Street Wants In
The following
is more opinion based on facts, as near as I can determine. These trade negotiations are so secret that
it is hard to tell, for sure, what is fact.
It is pointed out that most people don't even know that such trade
agreements are being developed.
"The Powers That Be," have done a superb job of cover up. Congress knows nothing as to what is included
in these negotiations and, apparently, can't find out either.
As all of you,
who have followed me, even for a short time, know, I am an Obama man, BUT I am
very disappointed in some of his actions, so far, in his second term. It's like he has just washed his hands from
these trade agreements and just let the Corporate boys take over. If he let's these
agreements continue to the end and then signs these agreements without any
public debate and without Congress having some say in the final drafts, then he
has really dropped the ball big time.
I strongly
suggest that you go back and read last week's article and then see how this one
all ties together. Folks, I don't know anymore about all this than you do when
you have read these two articles, but it sounds to me as though they could be
bad news for everyone, except big corporations and Wall Street. I urge you to keep this in mind and watch for
more information in this regard. I will
watch for more and give it to you as I see any.
There is a lot more involved here than just food, which is bad enough.
~
The
following is from my comments as posted on June 25, 2013, part 40
There is a tremendous amount of articles,
commentators, political pundits, politicians, and others that are proclaiming
and pronouncing various thoughts as to where our country is going and how it is
getting there.
At this point, I am not guaranteeing that these articles
are all factual, BUT
I feel that what some of these writers are saying is based on what they see and
believe to be facts. As I
said, there are various approaches relating to the future of our country and
the why and how we are headed in a particular direction.
I, personally, believe that there is a strong
movement to take us in some different direction than DEMOCRACY. There is simply too much evidence to ignore,
that POWER is the goal of a small group, as compared to 99%, that want the 99%
to be their servants or even slaves, if you will.
I read a lot and, of course, I can't give you
everything I read. If I did, you
wouldn't read any of it. I try to pick
out the material that I believe sets forth possibilities, that I don't believe
any of us want. You can certainly agree
or disagree with me, and, frankly, this is my purpose, and regardless of your
position, I just want you to be aware of what some respected people in our
country are thinking. As you go about
your everyday activities, keep these things in mind. Be aware of how they relate to what you are
seeing happen before your very eyes.
These movements have been going on for two decades
or more. The changes that some want,
take a generation or more to get the people to the point of accepting the new
and different government.
This is evident by the universities that are
teaching Ayn Rand philosophy, or the universities that are being controlled by
the Koch Brothers and their attempts to purchase some of the largest newspapers
in the country. The so-called war on
women that takes away their rights to determine what is right for their health
is just another example of ruling over citizens rights. There is no end to it and you are aware of
most of it. NO
MATTER WHAT IT TAKES, WE MUST KEEP DEMOCRACY.
IT'S WORKED QUITE WELL FOR MORE THAN 200 YEARS. WE NEED TO KEEP IT FOR ANOTHER 200
YEARS.
~
The
Free-Trade Job-Loss Express
is Coming Straight at Us.
Dave Johnson
Campaign for America’s Future / Op-Ed
Published: Sunday 18 August 2013
The giant multinationals
are pushing a trade deal that will literally let them bypass our laws. This deal is called the Trans-Pacific
Partnership (TPP) and it is coming at us in the next few months. The corporations are trying to switch this
gravy-train onto the “Fast Track.” For
them this deal is the light at the end of the tunnel of democracy and
self-government that has been trying to reign them in. We need to get this runaway train back on the
rails or We the People will be begging for scraps thrown from the caboose. Call
your Senators and Representative today and let them know that people
are paying attention and oppose “Fast Track trade authority.”
Fast Track
President Obama’s US
Politico has the
story inside their story USTR headed to Japan to attack auto trade barriers,
[The US trade representative's] trip comes as the
Obama administration hustles to make a major trade deal with Japan and 10 other Pacific
Rim countries happen by the end of this year.
… The Obama administration
needs Congress to approve “fast-track” authority guaranteeing that TPP would
get a vote without amendments ….
The administration has a
short window of opportunity before campaigning revs up for the 2014 election,
making it a near-impossible environment to get such a massive trade deal done.
Giant Multinational Corporations Hope To Push This
Through
If TPP passes it will override American law. Again: we will not be able to pass laws that
reign in the corporations. We will not
be able to protect our jobs and wages because, as we have seen, companies can
just close a factory and move your job to a country that pays very little,
doesn’t protect the environment, and doesn’t let working people do anything
about it. Of course the giant companies
want these agreements — they let them tell us that if we ask for decent wages
or benefits they will fire us and move our job out of the country.
Right now because of trade
agreements already in effect we are not allowed to make laws even putting information like “dolphin safe” on tuna can
labels. El Salvador is being sued by a Canadian
mining company for trying to require environmental permits,
because of a similar trade agreement. This is what these trade agreements mean
to our ability to reign in the giant corporations.
The giant,
multinational corporations and their business groups are hopeful that they can
push this through. The Financial Times
explains, in Obama’s ‘fast-track’ trade push faces congressional delays,
Corporate lobbyists, who
have been pushing for a quick and uncontroversial approval of TPA [Fast
Track], say they are still confident the talks will be successful.
“We are seeing signs of
good support and momentum for TPA legislation in Congress and from the
administration,” said David Thomas, vice-president for trade policy at the
Business Roundtable, representing big blue-chip companies.
They Will Push It Through
Like the Iraq
So here is what is coming — soon. Lobbyists for the giant multinationals have
been working behind the scenes to slip Fast Track through their friends in
Congress. They will argue that the usual
process Congress holding hearings, getting everyone’s viewpoint and hearing
everyone’s concerns, then amending as needed and carefully considering the bill
before a vote (also known as “representative democracy”) will just get in the
way of getting this done. They will want as much of this done behind the scenes
because regular people will naturally be upset about our Congress handing over
their authority like this.
If the multinationals get Fast Track pushed through there
will still be a vote in Congress, but it will be rushed. That vote will occur after the corporate
machine has cranked up a full-scale, mega-million-dollar PR push. It will become “conventional wisdom” among all
of the “Serious People” that free-trade agreement “create jobs.” People worried about the agreement’s effect on
jobs and wages, etc. will be marginalized, called luddites and dirty hippies
who are “against progress” and are “killing jobs” and all the things working
people have been called as other “free trade” agreements have been pushed
through.
But these
stakeholders have turned out to be right about these free trade agreements.
Look at the results of past trade agreements — massive job loss, stagnant and
falling wages, entire regions (think Detroit, Cleveland, Flint, etc.)
devastated and look at the resulting inequality with the 1% now receiving all
of the gains from the economy! (Last Year’s Korea-US free trade agreement has already cost 40,000 jobs and increased our trade
deficit by $5.8 billion.)
From what we know about TPP (it is still secret, even
though they want it passed within months) it looks to be more of the same.
Rigged Negotiating Process
The process for negotiating TPP has been rigged from the
start. It has been negotiated in secret by corporate-interest with other
stakeholders excluded. (Government
employees involved move to high-paying corporate positions once the agreement
is completed.) More than 600
representatives of corporate-interest groups have been “advising” while
representatives of labor, human rights, civil justice, consumer, environmental
and other stakeholder groups have been kept away from the negotiating table. Congress has also been kept out and has not
yet seen the agreement. This is a rigged process that is designed to reach a
conclusion in the interests of the giant corporations and not
taking into account the interest of environmental, labor, human rights and
other stakeholders who will be affected by the results.
Call Your Senators And Representative!
Call your member of Congress and both of your Senators
and tell them not to yield Congress’ authority to “Fast Track.” Do this today.
We can not tolerate Fast Track after the way this
agreement has been negotiated. Don’t let
Congress put itself in the position of no see, no amend, no time to think it
through, all while a huge corporate PR campaign is underway. With Fast Track Congress will not be able to
make changes and will have no time to think about the consequences.
Corporations are supposed to be subject to the laws that
We, the People make. The current
trade-agreement process is the other way around. It sets up a situation where
democracy is a competitive disadvantage, because things like good wages and
environmental laws are a “cost.” It sets up a process of negotiations between
corporate interests that sits above our laws, limiting what we can do about it.
These trade agreements get democracy out
of the way. "Fast Track” gets
democracy out of the way so they can ram these agreements through. Don’t let them get away with
this.
~~~
Will High Court Widen The Flood
Money In Politics?
Bloomberg View
August
26th, 2013 5:30 pm
Aug. 26
(Bloomberg) — One of the first
cases the Supreme Court will consider in its next session is whether to allow
millions, perhaps billions, more dollars into the U.S.
That may
seem like a joke considering that more than $6 billion was pumped into last
year’s elections. A flood of
special-interest money, courtesy of rulings by Chief Justice John Roberts’
court, led to a campaign that many found depressing.
The
issue that will be argued on October 8 is whether to remove the almost
four-decade limit on the aggregate amounts any contributor can give directly to
candidates and parties for federal elections in a single cycle. There are no limits now on independent
expenditures or money given to political action committees, creating what
critics call a system of legalized indirect bribery.
~~~
NEW YORK TIMES
STUNNER.
Dear MoveOn member, 8-22-13
This is stunning: The New
York Times' data wizard Nate Silver—who predicted
the 2012 election results state-by-state with uncanny accuracy—is now
projecting that, "Republicans
[are] close to even-money to win control of the [Senate] after next year's
elections."1
It's the worst-case
scenario: Republicans win a majority in the Senate, and we can kiss the rest of
President Obama's agenda goodbye.
To make things worse, they have a plan to steal the 2014
election starting right now by making it harder
for seniors, students, poor people, and African-Americans to vote.
Back in May, the Supreme Court gutted the Voting
Rights Act. Since then, Republicans in key states have been racing to
purge voter rolls, eliminate early voting, and require new photo IDs to
vote—anything they can do to make it harder to vote.
And in an election as
close as this one will be, even 1-2 percentage points could turn the tide.
You think the fights over the budget, Obamacare, and immigration
is bad now? Imagine Mitch McConnell in
control of the U.S.
The 2014 election is
hugely important—and we can't let Republicans steal it now. So if you think you'll want to get involved
sometime next year, I ask you: Please get engaged right now.
We're raising $250,000 this week to launch a 'Let Us Vote'
Campaign to fight back right now—while it can make the greatest difference. Will you help?
How blatant are the GOP's efforts? North
Carolina
Why there? Sen. Kay
Hagan of North Carolina North Carolina
To reverse the effects of this effort, we have
a 3-pronged plan of attack:
1. We'll
launch state-by-state campaigns to roll back discriminatory voter suppression
laws, rules and regulations when state legislatures are back in session.
2. We'll
prepare a traditional and online media blitz, highlighting both the actions of
extreme politicians like North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory and the stories of
heroic individual voters whose rights are being trampled.
3. We'll
organize an aggressive counter-intimidation campaign to mobilize the very same
voters who are being disenfranchised. This tactic was proven to work last
election, when showing voters what Republicans are really up to actually
motivated unlikely voters to overcome barriers to get to the polls.3
We helped beat back the GOP voter suppression
machine in 2012—and we can do it again—but all of us need to help. And we
can't afford to wait until next year. Are
you in to support our "Let Us Vote" campaign?
Thanks for all you do.
–Anna, Alex, Jessica, Nick, and the rest of the team
Sources:
1. "Senate Control
in 2014 Increasingly Looks Like a Tossup", The New York Times, July
15, 2013
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=292665&id=73627-18264426-CThu4Rx&t=6
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=292665&id=73627-18264426-CThu4Rx&t=6
2. "Hagan demands
review of NC voter law," The Hill, August 13, 2013
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=292652&id=73627-18264426-CThu4Rx&t=7
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=292652&id=73627-18264426-CThu4Rx&t=7
3. "How Voter Backlash Against Voter Suppression Is
Changing Our Politics," The Nation, April 29, 2013
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=292696&id=73627-18264426-CThu4Rx&t=8
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=292696&id=73627-18264426-CThu4Rx&t=8
Want to support our work? MoveOn Civic Action is entirely funded by our
8 million members—no corporate contributions, no big checks from CEOs. And our tiny staff ensures that small
contributions go a long way. Chip in here.
~~~
DEMOCRATS
TAKE NOTE:
Democrat Friends:
I just got back from the DNC summer meeting inArizona
We have a four-pronged plan for the coming year:
Recruiting and training top talent.
I just got back from the DNC summer meeting in
We have a four-pronged plan for the coming year:
Recruiting and training top talent.
Our party is only as
strong as the people in it. So we're going to focus on identifying great
candidates for state and local offices, training organizers across the country,
and helping talented young people from all backgrounds break into politics
through our Hope Institute program.
Maintaining and building our digital edge.
Maintaining and building our digital edge.
A big part of the reason
we won last year is because our online program and tools were light years ahead
of the Republicans. But that's the thing about cutting-edge technology -- it
stops being cutting-edge pretty quickly. We're not going to rest on our
laurels. We're going to work hard to
maintain our edge while developing the next generation of tools.
Expanding access to the ballot box.
Expanding access to the ballot box.
Every single thing we do
as a party centers on our most fundamental right as Americans -- the right to
vote. You've seen Republicans across the
country restrict that right by taking advantage of the recent Supreme Court
decision to gut the Voting Rights Act.
And we're going to be fighting back by launching a national voter
protection program.
Holding Republicans accountable and promoting the Democratic agenda.
Holding Republicans accountable and promoting the Democratic agenda.
You've heard Republicans
talk a lot about how they're"
rebranding" their
party and agenda to be more inclusive after last year's election. But if you've been paying attention to the
policies they're supporting, you've noticed that they've only gotten more
extreme. We're going to make sure they
don't get away with that bait-and-switch.
Many people are going to work very hard to make sure this plan succeeds, but I have to be straight with you: a main factor in its success or failure will be whether we have the resources to pull it off.
Chip in $10 or more today and make sure we can put our plan into motion:
https://my.democrats.org/Our-Strategy
This is a winning plan -- and I can't wait to get to work on it with you, because we saw last year what we're capable of.
Thanks,
Debbie
Debbie Wasserman Schultz
Chair
Democratic National Committee
P.S. -- You've seen what we can do when we get this organization operating at its peak -- let's do it again.
Many people are going to work very hard to make sure this plan succeeds, but I have to be straight with you: a main factor in its success or failure will be whether we have the resources to pull it off.
Chip in $10 or more today and make sure we can put our plan into motion:
https://my.democrats.org/Our-Strategy
This is a winning plan -- and I can't wait to get to work on it with you, because we saw last year what we're capable of.
Thanks,
Debbie
Debbie Wasserman Schultz
Chair
Democratic National Committee
P.S. -- You've seen what we can do when we get this organization operating at its peak -- let's do it again.
~~~
Putting Workers on TV: MSNBC's
Chris Hayes on Bringing Labor To Prime.
Amy Dean
Yes! Magazine
/ Interview
Published: Monday 19 August 2013
PERSONAL NOTE FROM FLOYD:
I haven't said anything about it
in the past, but I was real disappointed when Ed Schultz was taken off of MSNBC
Weekly and changed to Saturday and Sunday.
I guess there were a lot of other people that felt the same, because,
starting this week, he is back on weekly nights at 5:00 PM Eastern.
Now, I have liked Chris Hayes,
who filled the time slot that Ed did have.
However, he is not an Ed Schultz.
He is going to be a true star in his own right and I was glad to know,
from this article below, that he didn't even know anything about the change
until after it had been made. Also, in
this article you will note that he gives Ed some real nice recognition. Floyd
As host
of All In, a
weekday prime-time show on MSNBC, Chris Hayes has emerged as one of the most
prominent progressive commentators in the country. Still in his thirties, Hayes earned
distinction in the 2000s as a labor and political journalist for magazines such
as In These Times and The Nation. Given that labor journalists
are an endangered species in the United States
This month, I spoke with Hayes about how he approaches
workplace issues on his show, about the state of labor journalism, and about
how All In interacts
with programs such as The Ed Show,
hosted by Ed Schultz, another labor-friendly broadcaster.
Amy
Dean: How
do you think the prospects for labor journalism have changed over the past
decade?
Chris
Hayes: Labor
coverage has shrunk dramatically. Unions
have shrunk. I think there has been a
new crop of excellent young journalists writing about labor. Sarah Jaffe is really, really good—as are Mike
Elk and Josh Eidelson, to name just three. They are writing about the frontiers of labor.
"There's
more amazing work being done on more topics than probably ever."
As the number of workers covered by collective bargaining
agreements has shrunk, what ends up happening is that the coverage has expanded
to look at workers who aren't in unions. I think that is right and appropriate.
So I have a lot of faith. There's a lot
of really good reporting in the progressive press on workers. It's looking at different kinds emerging
models to build worker power that aren't necessarily [based on] an NLRB
election, since that process has been rendered completely dysfunctional and
impossible.
Dean: The idea of a labor beat
sounds anachronistic now, doesn't it? But
there used to be one at each of the major daily newspapers.
Hayes: Yeah. I came in at the tail end. I think even by the time I was coming of age
that was on the wane. Now it's really
gone.
Dean: Would you have any
recommendations for today's labor journalists trying to elevate their voices
above the noise?
Hayes: I think whether you're
doing cable news every night, or you're writing about the NSA, or you're
writing about fast food workers striking, the thing is to find the story. Stories are different than topics. Stories are
different than issues. Something happening, some new policies—that's not a
story. A story is about people. It's about protagonist and antagonist, about
the trajectory of a hero's journey, and about conflict, all of those things. What ends up grabbing us as readers or as
viewers is when you find the right story to talk about whatever the underlying
injustice is.
Dean: Along with Ed
Schultz and Rachel Maddow, you've covered topics like the bankruptcy in
Detroit, the Wisconsin uprisings against Gov. Scott Walker, and the movement to
raise the minimum wage. How do you think
MSNBC's coverage has affected the wider media landscape, in terms of making
issues of concern to working people more central?
Hayes: I think it's a huge net
benefit. And I think Ed Schultz deserves
tremendous credit for being a pioneer in this regard. Labor issues are getting
more coverage than they've ever gotten before on cable news, first and foremost
thanks to Ed Schultz, and then assisted by others of us who've taken up that
mantle. I've been covering labor since I was a reporter at In These Times at the age of 24 or
25. When you actually can put workers on
television, like we've done a whole host of times, I think that's really
powerful.
"The
one thing I can kind of control every day is what we put on air between the
hours of and eight and nine eastern."
It's such an uphill
battle to drive the conversation. But I
have to say—to use the example of the fast food workers—we started covering
that story in the spring, during maybe our first week on the air. We had some fast food workers on then. This
time around, [during the most recent wave of strikes], the workers were
on Morning Joe; they were
all over Fox; they were on CNN. The McDonald's budget was on the Todayshow and it was on Colbert. I know the way this industry works: People do
look at what other people are covering on TV. So I think we do have an effect when we
elevate that kind of stuff.
Dean: Your debut as a host
of your own prime time show on MSNBC was not without controversy. Some viewers were upset that Ed Schultz's
program—which had a focus on labor issues—was moved to the weekend. They
worried that the network would be less aggressive in speaking to the concerns
of working people. How did you handle
that type of feedback from viewers?
Hayes: The decision about
how the network is programmed is quite literally made above my pay grade. I came into it after the decision with Ed had
already been made. I genuinely was not a
party to that. I take seriously people's concern about the uniqueness of Ed's
focus on the working class and labor issues. I think we have done a pretty good
job of fulfilling that, making sure the voices of workers are front and center.
I think that we're putting more working
people on prime-time television than anyone else right now.
The thing I've learned more than anything in my first
four months on the job is [to appreciate] that old serenity prayer about what
you can control and what you can't. The
one thing I can kind of control every day is what we put on air between the
hours of and eight and nine eastern and whether that meets the standards and
vision I have for what we can do with this very precious real estate. Everything outside of that—what people think
about the show, how they react to it, how they react to me, what they think of
me—I genuinely can't control. So I don't
try to control it. I try to focus on the
work and produce the best work I can produce. And I try to have faith that that will
ultimately be what makes or breaks me.
Dean: Do you see yourself
more in a role of illuminating the problems facing our nation, or as
highlighting efforts to resist and turn things around?
Hayes: I think it's a
balance of both. That's something we
think about. There are different stories that might produce pathos, empathy,
anger, rage, sadness, inspiration, or hope. You need to be thinking about combining and
mixing those every night. Viewers will get exhausted if it's just an hour of
rage, or an hour of stories that are total bummers, or if it's just an hour of
bright, inspirational segments.
Hitting those different notes is something we think about
all the time—not just with stories about working people and the economy. It's about making sure there's a mix of
stories that have different colors to them in terms of how you emotionally
connect. It might be, "That's an outrage. I'm angry about that." Or, "That's
really sad." Or, "That is
totally inspirational." Or, "That is hilarious." Whatever it is, you need to be attentive so
that you are not playing one note.
Dean: You have mentioned a
decline in labor coverage. At the same
time, you seem to be indicating that there is more good labor writing out there
today than in years. What do you make of
these contradictory trends?
Hayes: I don't think there is
enough [labor journalism]. But the nature of the current media environment is
that there's more amazing work being done on more topics than probably ever in
the history of journalism. The downside
is that it's harder and harder for those things to get traction.
There's a lot of amazing work being done. It's just that there's such a crowded field
that things don't have the power they would have if they were on the front page
of the Kansas City Star thirty
years ago. That's the tradeoff.
~~~
If the good Lord is willing and the creek don't rise, I'll talk with you
again next Tuesday, September 3, 2013.
God Bless You All
&
God Bless the United States of America
Floyd
