Democrats & Liberals: Archives

For many of us fiscal conservatives, this is a vote that will not be forgotten. Canada is looking prettier all the time, at least there tax payers get a fair amount back for their tax dollar and the gov’t isn’t peaking into everyone’s lives.

I find this hypocritical attitude typical of the right wing and the GOP. Their lack of postive moral and compassionate virtues while hypocritically claiming otherwise is what makes our country into the hated and feared facist state we have become.
I continue to verbally spar with cowards who support this administration and the war for oil and power it started without any gumption to do what Bush needs them to do, which is enlist. I, BTW, have done MY duty and have many years before put my assets on the line in service to my country. I expect no less from the cowardly chickenhawks who mindlessly support this adminstration! Unfortunately they are all talk and little real action. And the battle of wits with the unarmed is getting a bit tiresome! Few, if any, are capable of intellegent debate. All the seemingly can do is repeat the GOP and Bushit rheteric by mindlessly attacking showing, again, they must be brain-dead or otherwise incapable of thinking for themselves!

Qat, you have crossed a line here with your comments. It is fine if you want to call poltiicians or leaders of parties cowards, but, when you level such claims at those who support them, you have begun to Critique the characters of many Messengers here, instead of their message, and that as you can see at the top of each column is not permitted here.

If you wish to retain your privilege to share your thoughts here, comply with our Critique the Message, Not the Messenger rule.

It seems evident our government is in need of some kind of reform. There are a lot of ideas bouncing around out there. I’m hoping that some pick up steam. “We the people” seems to have been replaced with “We the corporations”, and the interests of contintuients in this nation seems served less and less with each passing year.

It’s hard to argue with qat’s point about supporters of the neocon agenda. The Bush administration campaign style of “single message/repeat ad nauseum/damn the truth” sells to a limited audience. He was elected as a moral leader but his agenda is not in the interests of his voters. That leaves many of his supporters angry at themselves and turning discussions into slugfests when, point by point, their arguments are invalidated and as their ‘moral’ agenda of gay marriage bans and honesty, etc… fall by the wayside and as it becomes clearer that the true allegience of Bush and the GOP is to the corporations from whom the wealthy 1% get their money, they will lose the advantage of the big lie and be voted out.

Corporate power is an inevitability in a capitalist society. What were you expecting, Taylor? That Wal-Mart, McDonalds, and Microsoft would start dishing out cash to “we the people?” If you’re gonna live in a capitalist society you have to start getting used to the idea of “we the corporations.”

I know I’m asking for a lot Zeek. It would be nice, nonetheless, to get back to a day when our representatives represent *us*.

I’m not ready to believe that capitalism and corruption have to walk hand in hand.

I have just voiced my opinion which, to some, is offensive. I TRY to make sense of the objectives of this administration and, so far, continue to be baffled by the obvious lack of epathy and positive ethics of the GOP and this administration and, apparently sometimes, it’s supporters. They…the GOP/administration claim to be “compassionate conservatives” while they continue to be fiscally irresponsible. And their “moral” stance seems to be based on lies, deception, greed and hunger for power. Their supporters continue to exhort for the liberals to willingly enlist themselves while they….(please go to about any of the many MBs and you can see this for yourselves)….the radcons…..remain safely behind on their keyboards spreading the GOP/admistration misconceptions and mispeech without, apparently, really thinking it out for themselves. Mindless prating for the GOP rheteric seems to be their answer to anything nonGOP supported.
I didn’t call ALL supporters of this administration cowards though those who are truely know who they are! I am sorry if that breaches you posting rules and will attempt to keep my references to cowardice in the GOP supporters ranks to a minimum. But I will voice the truth.
There are a FEW real heros in the GOP supporter’s ranks…..my grandfather, for one. John McCain was yet another. I just don’t agree with either’s pratings of the GOP is moral or right. But then again, neither is the liberal view 100% correct. WE can only do as our conscience allows. Mine has be be as truthful as I can be because it will bite me on my asset if I don’t!

As you can tell from my posts I’m getting pretty disgusted by congresses latest round of giveaways. Do corporations want protection from being sued by consumers? ok, lets have some “tort reform”. Are credit cards losing money by being too loose with their cash? ok, bankruptcy law “reform”. Do oil companies to drill in a wildlife preserve? no problemo!

And then, is veteran’s health care getting to expensive? wait a minute - we’re not made of money here! we have to save giveaways for those that can afford lobbyists! so let’s pass on the increases cost with means testing and user fees.

The priorities for this congress are blatently against the interest of the people that elected them, and blatently in favor of big business. I don’t think it’s a neocon problem, personally - I think it’s just the old law tha “power corrupts”. With one party pulling all the strings of government, why NOT make lobbyists happy?

William, I enjoyed your article and I agree with it, however you said:
“Recent posts have discussed the recent bankruptcy bill, which has been widely criticized as heavily biased in favor of the credit card industry.”

Actually, as far as I know, this topic was never really addressed by a WB article in any of the columns. Did someone write an article regarding the Bankruptcy Bill? If so, perhaps I simply missed it.

Specifically, I would like to ask the Dems who write articles or who regularly respond on this side of WB what they think of this list of Democrats who voted yea on the bankruptcy bill:
Baucus (D-MT), Yea
Bayh (D-IN), Yea
Biden (D-DE), Yea
Bingaman (D-NM), Yea
Byrd (D-WV), Yea
Carper (D-DE), Yea
Conrad (D-ND), Yea
Inouye (D-HI), Yea
Johnson (D-SD), Yea
Kohl (D-WI), Yea
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Lincoln (D-AR), Yea
Nelson (D-FL), Yea
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Pryor (D-AR), Yea
Reid (D-NV), Yea
Salazar (D-CO), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Yea
Also:
Clinton (D-NY), Not Voting

I was especially surprised and very disappointed by Byrd’s vote - because he gave such impassioned oratory against it, then inexplicably voted Yea.

Zeek:
“If you’re gonna live in a capitalist society you have to start getting used to the idea of “we the corporations.”“

Well, since this administration has no problem with changing our Constitution to suit their agendas, we may yet see a proposal to amend the it along those lines. It would certainly be in keeping with where their true loyalty lies.
No matter how long I live in America, I’ll never get used to the idea that corporate entities are somehow entitled to more protection than individual citizens.

Adrienne, Bert had a nice post recently on bankrupcy, http://www.watchblog.com/democrats/archives/002114.html

I don’t know why the Dems caved in so completely. Disgusting. I’m personally not convinced it’s a bad idea to have a reform bill - but it’s pretty clear that the bill could have been amended to be better for consumers. Certainly if my Senator were on that list I’d want to hear his explanation for the vote.

@Taylor
I’m not saying capitalism walks hand-in-hand with corruption. I’m just saying it’s closely associated with corporate power. I suppose if you really despised corporations you could call this corruption, but I think that’s stretching it just a wee-bit.

@Adrienne, You said
“I’ll never get used to the idea that corporate entities are somehow entitled to more protection than individual citizens.”

What makes you think that’s how I feel? I feel that they aren’t entitled to more protection or rights; they can get them anyways because they have so much influence/power. And I can assure you that whether or not you choose to accept this makes no difference to the corporations.

I have become very cynical about politics. We really have a one party system in America (that being said I am a registered member of the Democratic party) The Dems are trying so hard to get elected that they parrot the GOP, thus am I surprised that so many of them voted with the GOP, NO I am not. But what I am surprised at is the publics ability to ignore out of the GOP what they seemed (And still do) condemn out of the Dems. Look at Delay and his firing of a Republican who held him accountable to the ethics that they had. If a Dem had changed the ethics laws of that committee to keep from being held accountable, well get out the rope cause there would have been a lynching. Another contradiction that really is i pain in my a— is what has been called Gannongate. A prostitute used an alias to get access to the West Wing and the pres. Because if being gay is so bad well Gannon was a GAY prostitute,AND if being gay is a threat to marriage you know it has to be a threat to national security. Where is the secret service? If he could get access then who is to say a terrorist couldn’t as well. When Clinton made a miss step, well let us say hundreds of thousands could be spent to uncover sex in the oval office (not saying that it was ok. Adultry is not OK. Just pointing out that we are more worried about sex than safety in the West Wing). Where is the outrage? Why is the GOP allowed so many passes that the Dems are not. When Clinton lied no one DIED!

William,

Thanks for the link. Obviously, I did miss that article - I think I must have read the first few lines and thought it was another thread about Social Security.

“it’s pretty clear that the bill could have been amended to be better for consumers.”

The thing that really gets me about that Bill is that so many people who declare bankruptcy do so because of medical reasons due to a lack of health insurance. Nothing is being done about those rising costs, nor are people getting the best deal on prescription drugs that they can - both situations are thanks to this administration.
Also, these days there are quite a few National Guard soldiers stationed in Iraq or Afghanistan (many being forced to remain there) who are finding themselves broke and unable to pay their bills without the salaries from their regular stateside jobs. So much for Republican’s “supporting the troops”, eh? They can do all the flag waving they want, meanwhile these brave people can’t even take care of their finances and support their families. It makes me so, so SICK.

Tomorrow is the two year anniversary of Bush and Co.’s Unnecessary War in Iraq - and the situation there is worse now than ever.
*5473 of our soldiers (some of whom are going bankrupt, as I mentioned) have been wounded there, but were then returned to active duty.
*5871 have been seriously wounded there- but are being returned home in the dark, so that American’s don’t get to see them and dwell on the fact that the costs of war aren’t just about money.
*1521 of our soldiers have died in Iraq - because of Neocon lies.
*9 billion of our tax dollars have been LOST there and nobody knows where it might have gone - nor will the majority in Congress call for an investigation to find out.
Things here in America just keep getting more terrible for everyone but the wealthy.
There are no longer any checks and balances in our government.
The corporations rule.
The media is suppressing the truth at best, or we are being fed govt. propaganda at worse.
But Lefties only get shat on for being “pessimistic” while the Righties are so refreshingly “optimistic”!
(Sigh) I wonder when we’ll all get so fed up we’ll simply throw in the towel and realize that, as David observed, “Canada is looking prettier all the time”…

Zeek:
“What makes you think that’s how I feel?”

Oopps. Guess I missed the sarcasm?

“I feel that they aren’t entitled to more protection or rights; they can get them anyways because they have so much influence/power.”

Yeah, and now they’ve got the entire government at their complete bidding.

“And I can assure you that whether or not you choose to accept this makes no difference to the corporations.”

Sure, I know that. Some corporate entities, like Enron or Worldcom, don’t even give a shit about their own stockholders, let alone the rest of us peons.

What ever happened to businesses assuming more responsibility? Why is our congress coming after the consumer when the credit card industry is just as much to blame. Why don’t we see restrictions on extending credit to the consumer. The credit card industry gives credit lines to people with horrible credit histories, what do they expect. Government needs to step up to the plate and hold these lenders accountable. If they lose some money, they should look at their lending practices and not give credit to those who are “high risk.” This bill makes it more difficult for those who have been screwed by our health care system.
I also work at a VA hospital. I am very disappointed in the Bush administration with their lack of funding. Hospital care is actually very good, but if it takes 3 months to get an MRI, or half a year to see your primary care physicain, the care received does not seem like much of a benefit.
Onto the Pay-as-you-go bill that was voted down. Those who voted against this bill will pay the next time these politicians are up for election. I can’t think of anything that makes more sense, but sense is something you rarely find in politics.
Ivan

Seems my link to that Salon.com article doesn’t work, so here it is again. It’s by Mark Benjamin, entitled ‘The Invisible Wounded’ - Injured soldiers evacuated to the U.S. never arrive in the light of day — and the Pentagon has yet to offer a satisfactory explanation why.

Ivan, what you’re failing to realize is that credit card companies intentionally look for people with lousy credit history. Why? Because that’s where they make the vast majority of their money. How is this possible you may ask? Simple, the risk factor of someone with bad credit history filing bankruptcy is already figured into the credit debt interest rates. Thus, the people who are forever entrenched in credit card debt compensate for the people who never cough-up.

Simply ask anyone who works for a credit card company why they keep lending money to all these “bad credit history people” and you can verify my statements. Once you affirm this you will realize why the credit card industry is one of the most ruthless industries known to man.

“it’s pretty clear that the bill could have been amended to be better for consumers.”

From the Washington Post http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17567-2005Mar8.html

Set up a new test for measuring a debtor’s ability to repay. People with insufficient assets or income could still file a Chapter 7 bankruptcy, which if approved by a judge erases debts entirely after certain assets are forfeited. But those with income above the state’s median income who can pay at least $6,000 over five years — $100 a month — would be forced into Chapter 13, where a judge would order a repayment plan.

Under current law, a bankruptcy judge determines under which chapter of the bankruptcy code a person falls — whether they have to repay some or all of their debt.

• Require people filing for bankruptcy to pay for credit counseling.

• Give top priority to a spouse’s claims for child support among creditors’ claims on a debtor in bankruptcy.

• Allow for special accommodations for active-duty service members, low-income veterans and those with serious medical conditions in the new income test for bankruptcy applicants.

• Restrict the homestead exemption in states to $125,000 if the person in bankruptcy bought his or her residence at least three years and four months before filing. Florida, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota and Texas have unlimited homestead exemptions that allow wealthy people to file for bankruptcy and keep their mansions in those states sheltered from creditors.

“The credit card industry gives credit lines to people with horrible credit histories, what do they expect.”

Maybe pay their bills, or don’t use a credit card to buy something they cannot pay for. Novel idea I guess.

Take another look at the first paragraph from the Washington Post. This bill effects those with an income above the state median income. So these are above average wage earners. In addition the would be required to pay $100 per month for 5 years for a total of $6000. $100 per month should not be that big a burden for an above average wage earner when the rest of their debt is being wiped off of their ledger and added to all of ours.

That’s right, you, I and everyone else who uses a credit card and pays our bills pick up the tab for those who file bankruptcy. We pay higher rates and fees than would be required if everyone paid their bills.

Contrary to what is being stated in these posts there are provisions for service members and veterans.

A very good Bankruptcy article from Joseph Pomykala, PhD in Economics.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/reg20n4e.html

Kirk, you are not paying higher rates for those who go bankrupt. The CC companies recover that money via 29.9% interest rates on those with less than stellar credit scores.

My wife and I at one point, having never been late on payments or errant in any other way, had two credit card companies jack our rate up from 7% to 22.9 and 29.9% for no other reason than we crossed some magical number as to how much outstanding credit card debt we should be carrying.

Mind you, we pay our bills and do not live beyond our means - yet, we paid off those card at those rates.

NO, Kirk, they are getting their money back - in fact, the industry is one of the top profitable industries in America - which begs the question - why did the Republicans stick it to the majority of those who file bankruptcy for absolutely legitimate reasons, unanticipated health care costs, lowering of salaries through layoffs and hiring anew at lower pay, or death, disability, or divorce from a wage earner?

I suspect lawyers will find creative ways for the wealthy to hide assets before filing… that is what many of them get paid to do, right?

And what is the $125,000 cap on domiciles? You would be hard pressed to find a decent home in any major city in the country for $125,000. Was this a way of hitting Democrats who live in the large urban areas?
I guess the intent was to insure that anyone nor wealthy filing bankruptcy be forced to move to below middle class housing as part of the bankruptcy relief. Great way to punish the kids of middle class parents who find they have to file.

Kirk,
What is the purpose of a credit score? The whole reason to me,seems to be to point out those people who are “high risk.” Your response was; “Maybe have people pay their bills, or don’t use a credit card for things they can’t afford.” What a novel idea. Isn’t it obvious that these people who have a poor credit score have all ready proven to the world that they do not have any self control. Isn’t that the purpose of giving them a poor credit rating. I’m not standing up for those who have no self control, I just think that the credit card industry should have some restrictions on how much credit they give to people. We end up footing the bills for those idiots who can’take control of their own money. As Zeek pointed out, credit card companies target these people so that they can make alot ofinterest off of these consumers, and then when they finally file bankruptcy, those who live within our means end up paying the bill. I think that a politician with some common sense should pass a law stating how much credit can be given to people with low credit scores. What I worry about is those people who have health insurance, who get stuck with 20% of a million dollar bill. Or I worry about those who have an emergency out of their HMO network and get stuck with 50-100% of an extremely large bill. Maybe someone can explain these issues to me because I don’t completely understand how these people will be dealt with.
Ivan

Today is the 2nd aniversery of the war in Iraq and my grandbaby’s 3rd birthday…..kinda sux for our president to do that to a small child, huh?!
Happy b-day Becca from Grandmama! WE love you!

Relating to the bankruptcy bill:

Rejected
10-Mar
On the Amendment S.Amdt. 129
Schumer Amdt. No. 129; To limit the exemption for asset protection trusts.

Rejected
10-Mar
On the Amendment S.Amdt. 83
Leahy Amdt. No. 83; To modify the definition of disinterested person in the Bankruptcy Code.

Rejected
10-Mar
On the Amendment S.Amdt. 105
Akaka Amdt. No. 105; To limit claims in bankruptcy by certain unsecured creditors.

Rejected
10-Mar
On the Amendment S.Amdt. 70
Kennedy Amdt. No. 70; To exempt debtors whose financial problems were caused by failure to receive alimony or child support, or both, from means testing.

Rejected
09-Mar
On the Amendment S.Amdt. 68
Kennedy Amdt. No. 68; To provide a maximum amount for a homestead exemption under State law.

Rejected
09-Mar
On the Amendment S.Amdt. 67
Dodd Amdt. No. 67; To modify the bill to protect families, and for other purposes.

Rejected
09-Mar
On the Amendment S.Amdt. 62
Boxer Amdt. No. 62; To provide for the potential disallowance of certain claims.

Rejected
09-Mar
On the Amendment S.Amdt. 66
Harkin Amdt. No. 66; To increase the accrual period for the employee wage priority in bankruptcy.

Rejected
09-Mar
On the Amendment S.Amdt. 110
Durbin Amdt. No. 110; To clarify that the means test does not apply to debtors below median income.

Rejected
08-Mar
On the Amendment S.Amdt. 89
Feingold Amdt No. 89 ; To strike certain small business related bankruptcy provisions in the bill.

Rejected
08-Mar
On the Amendment S.Amdt. 47
Schumer Amdt. No. 47.; To prohibit the discharge, in bankruptcy, of a debt resulting from the debtor’s unlawful interference with the provision of lawful goods or services or damage to property used to provide lawful goods or services.

Rejected
03-Mar
On the Amendment S.Amdt. 49
Durbin Amdt. No. 49; To protect employees and retirees from corporate practices that deprive them of their earnings and retirement savings when a business files for bankruptcy.

Rejected
03-Mar
On the Amendment S.Amdt. 42
Schumer Amdt. No. 42; To limit the exemption for asset protection trusts.

Rejected
03-Mar
On the Amendment S.Amdt. 38
Durbin Amdt. No. 38; To discourage predatory lending practices.

Rejected
03-Mar
On the Amendment S.Amdt. 37
Nelson (FL) Amdt. No. 37; To exempt debtors from means testing if their financial problems were caused by identity theft.

Rejected
03-Mar
On the Amendment S.Amdt. 31
Dayton Amdt. No. 31.; To limit the amount of interest that can be charged on any extension of credit to 30 percent.

Rejected
02-Mar
On the Amendment S.Amdt. 32
Corzine Amdt. No. 32; To preserve existing bankruptcy protections for individuals experiencing economic distress as caregivers to ill or disabled family members.

Rejected
02-Mar
On the Amendment S.Amdt. 29
Kennedy Amdt. No. 29; To provide protection for medical debt homeowners.

Rejected
02-Mar
On the Amendment S.Amdt. 28
Kennedy Amdt. No. 28.; To exempt debtors whose financial problems were caused by serious medical problems from means testing.

Rejected
02-Mar
On the Amendment S.Amdt. 15
Akaka Amdt. No. 15; To require enhanced disclosure to consumers regarding the consequences of making only minimum required payments in the repayment of credit card debt, and for other purposes.

Rejected
02-Mar
On the Amendment S.Amdt. 17
Feingold Amdt. No. 17.; To provide a homestead floor for the elderly.

Kirk:
“Contrary to what is being stated in these posts there are provisions for service members and veterans.”

There were some provisions, but not this one:
Rejected
01-Mar
On the Amendment S.Amdt. 16
Durbin Amdt. No. 16, As Modified.; To protect servicemembers and veterans from means testing in bankruptcy, to disallow certain claims by lenders charging usurious interest rates to servicemembers, and to allow servicemembers to exempt property based on the law of the State of their premilitary residence.

Wtf, Adrienne, couldn’t you just make a hyperlink next time? (Just kiddin ^_^)

Oh, and by the way, the little guy always get’s screwed when Republicans (modern day obviously) start passing fiscal laws. Or to illustrate my point, it’s the people that are already swamped in the quagmire that get the extra barrel of sewage dumped on them.