Almost a fourth of our children live in abject poverty! Cannot you imagine what that means?!? How can a child learn to read or write when they haven't eaten, and their wee tummy feels like it's going to eat itself? How can a child experience the joys of childhood if every day represents a struggle to survive?

Yeah, I think Johnson was spot on when he said that patriotism is the last refuge to which a scoundrel clings...

I fear for our future and our children's future and others......it is going to get UGLY. I am glad that I am 1/2 way done....I know that sounds awful, but that is how bad I think things are going to get.

Even when Democrats control both congress and the WH, it's still their fault. Or Joe Lieberman's.

Or so I've been told.

I know the person saying it doesn't understand how the government works.

Look into this thing called the "Filibuster." You'll find the word "control" does not apply.

That said, I think Bill Clinton should have vetoed Welfare reforms in the late 1990s. But they had him by his privates so while he was on trial, he was quite accommodating of what Republicans wanted to do in Congress.

Reagan and Bush paved the way, in particular by appointing members to the FCC, that eventually did away with any fairness in our media, by repealing the Fairness Doctrine.

If you want to use the word "control," we need about 65 Democrats in the Senate, the House needs to be Democratic, and a Democratic president. Then if they do nothing, I'll be right there with you, this time with an accurate complaint.

All I can say is, the first thing they'd better do is reform money in politics, and the electoral, voting systems to assure we can get to the polls, we have enough machines, and gerrymandering is a thing of the past, as if they start doing other things without addressing this, wow, the rich will be emptying out half of their fortunes to evict as many of them as possible, as quickly as possible.

How many of the many posters on progressive sites like this have actually contacted their members of the US House and Senate over issues they care about - written them, emailed them or best yet, called their office up. We are supposedly a government 'of, by and for' the people, and it COULD be that way if we as a people watched the politicians we elect as closely as we keep track of the contestants on The Idol.

But we SHOULDN'T HAVE TO.

We elect them to represent our interests and goals. We shouldn't have to constantly have to try to micromanage them to try nd convince them to do the right things and not do the wrong ones.

Although in fairness I didn't elect him, because he doesn't even come close to representing my interests and goals. It's vaguely possible that he represents the interests and goals of the people who voted for him. I personally think it's more likely that he represents the goals and interests of the people/groups that FUNDED him...

could have to do with how hard core active we are around here, but we have elected jan schakowsky, and the late great sid yates.

When they have majorities nd the WH the GOP will ram though things willy nilly, and block things and just generally have a grand old time advancing their agenda. Often with the support of too many Democrats helping to push them over the line. (Remember the Iraq War?)

But when Democrats are in control....awwww shucks we can't do anything because the GOP has (fill in whatever blanks are in vogue at the moment.) And the GOP agenda continues to advance.

Until that day Democrats have no choice but to follow the GOP plan.

...is for the people to have 100% control of the democratic party.

bipartisan board for all proposed bills, comprised of 50% neo-con advisors to assure that no one feels left out.

We wouldn't want to hurt the Republican's feelings,
and just imagine what Hannity or Rush would say!!!

We can't let the perfect be the enemy of the mediocre,
and Obama has to be President of ALL the people,
not just Democrats.

and 99% approval rating so have a mandate.

It is very informative. He worked like a dog. A yellow dog. You do not need a super majority. You need someone who is determined and it helps to have a Humphrey at your side.

The last time the Democrats you despise had control of both houses of Congress, we gave you the most significant advance in public health in half a century. You purity trolls punished that achievement by throwing the 2010 elections to the Republicans, a spectacular act of spite that destroyed any chance for any sort of progressive reform on any issue.

But you blame Obama because he Didn't. Even. Try.

Whatever, Jim. Come back when you figure out how the government works. High schools have classes in that sort of thing, check it out.

These are just sensible, responsible, common-sense measures that both parties can come together on. They've allowed us to reduce our deficits by record amounts during an economic freefall, with the additional benefit of ensuring awesome Wall Street jobs for our families.

Regards,

Important people who don't give a #%^* about the 99%

... just what is it the defense budget is defending?

...since the Democratic Party became Clintonized.



[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font][/center] [center] [/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]

My income consists of $189/mo. in Link (SNAP) benefits and $125/mo. 'transitional' cash assistance from my township government. My church provides for my rent and utilities, thank God (no pun intended).

After 161 quarters of gainful employment-- a figure supported by official Social security records, with contributions beginning at age 14-- I did not suddenly decide upon a life of 'leisure', as virtually every Republican and not a few Democrats seem to think. I need to work, I want to work and I want the DIGNITY that being employed has always given me!

The social safety net has been shredded beyond recognition.

over 40 and college degree. He was solid in the 90s making a lot of money but the layoffs started coming in the 2000's. Then the resume looks spotty because you take what you can get for jobs.

He's decided to be a truck driver now. He's always liked vehicles and is handy with them so it might actually work for him. Not what he expected to be doing at this point in his life though ...

You probably want a pony too ...

who talked about feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, housing the homeless, and healing the sick? Replaced by the morally reprehensible leaders of America who feed the greed of the 1% and ignore the myriad problems in their country, especially anything adversely affecting the poor, the uneducated, the needy. These leaders (?) spend most of their time collecting money from the greedy bastards who actually control the governments of the country: federal, state, and local.

If these leaders, including the president, cared about the hungry, the naked, the homeless, the sick...they could solve the problems rather quickly. Stop building useless war machines, close the Pentagon by combining all military services into one Army, close the useless bases around the world, close all the military playgrounds maintained around the world (includes resorts and golf courses), and spend the money instead to provide for the needs of all people in America. In other words, kill the military-industrial complex that Ike warned about decades ago.

Yes, I fully understand the greedy bastards will never do this. America will continue its role as a third-world country. This outcome is the end plan of corporatists, including Hillary Clinton.

No.
Not the Southern USA, but Latin America.
In many Latin American countries, the People have wrested their governments from the hands of their Oligarchs through near bloodless Ballot Box revolutions.
They have given us a Blue Print for "change".

When America's Working Class & Poor realize WE have more in common with each other
than we have in common with our 1% and their mouth pieces in Washington,
then WE can have "change" too!

Spread the WORD.
VIVA Democracy!
I pray we get some here soon!

gotten gains a lot further when people are hungry enough to work for 3 bowls of rice a day.

went from $1.2 mil in 2007 to $12.2 mil in 2013. I don't know if it's accurate, but we all know the Clinton's benefited greatly from Bill's years as prez.

They are gorging at the trough while real people are suffering. They don't give a shit. They want it all. Every last dime.

It's long past time we started shaming rich politicians of all stripes who fostered and nurtured this bullshit.

This is the real moral outrage of our time, not some ideological defense of taxable income for billionaires.

mother with three children one being very sick. It did not change much at all and I did a lot of lobbying. One of the organizations I used in lobbying was Bread for the World.

One of the programs I was trying to change was the food stamp program when it still had "fake" money for you to spend which made it too easy to sell if you wanted cash. I also talked about some other problems. I wrote to them asking for help in getting this changed. And then I learned something. They wrote a personal letter back saying that they understood what was happening in the things I described in my letter. Then they told me why they did not even try to touch the issues. Even back then (mid 70s) IF they had opened the can of worms to fix the problems the enemies of the program (rethugs) would have destroyed it completely. And not too many years later along comes newtie and just about did destroy one of the safety net programs.

What I learned is that sometimes when you are trying to fix the program you have too many enemies and will lose the whole thing. It is exactly what they are trying to do with ACA in their 50 repeal votes. We would be crazy to open the door for them to do more damage by putting up a bill that allows them to do that through amendments etc..

Yes, Democrats often fail to protect or correct vital programs but better that than to put them on the floor to be destroyed by the people we know are out to repeal all of them and at the moment those enemies are the majority in the House. In fact while we had a majority at the beginning of President Obama's first term it was very small and we have seen exactly how deadly the enemy can be with their parliamentary tricks.

We cannot risk losing more of the safety net without the votes to protect it by deliberately placing it into a vulnerable position ourselves.

I am praying that we get a majority in both houses these last two years of President Obama's last term and then if the Democrats to not act then we need to throw the bums out. We need to get the vote out and take control for at least the next 2 years. IMO we need to get the majority in both the House and Senate while we have a Democrat in the WH because we need to stop several things from happening: end the obstruction of voters, keep the US Supreme Court for getting any more conservative and protect what is left of the safety net.

offer a truly alternative viewpoint.

The average person, Democrat or Republican, (I believe) are closer in many of their views than they have been in 20 years. A good portion of confused/moderate independents and even some Republicans could be convinced to give liberal populism a chance. I am convinced of that.

Leadership seems to be so out of touch with the average American that they can't seem to grasp what is right in front of their faces....

I mean there was a reason all the steam is letting out of things like "Operation Spring".

But as long as the Democrats appear to be "Republican Light" or "Oligarchs with a heart" they are not going to be able to engage this dynamic. They are going to have to abandon their current trajectory and move back to what made the Democratic party great.

at least stood for what conservatives wanted even if they sometimes backed off the fight for the reasons I gave above.

Unfortunately that's the way it too often works. I've lived in a state that wanted to have a constitutional convention to address some of its constitutions shortcomings several times. In the end nothing was done because there are special interest groups who would take the opportunity to hijack the convention, and you'd end up with a nightmare, you all know which groups I'm referring to I'm sure.

I realize there is massive fraud in the welfare system the way it is now, but I guess I'd rather have my tax dollars still go to these programs, and maybe find a way to make them more effective. The alternative plan the republicans are down with is using my money to bomb some third world country back into the Stone Age. I know I'm not ok with that.

some Democratic "help" in getting that net well-frayed...

" let me be clear that the main way to end poverty is jobs that result in a livable income, and the education necessary to get and keep those jobs."

Goddammit it Get real. Stop living in your leftist fantasy world.

and everyone in this country knows it.

We first need to begin to respect and define unpaid work.

According to the AARP it would cost tax payers over $450 BILLION dollars per year if we were to replace the unpaid labor of care giving so women can go out there and make rich men richer saying, "Do you want fries with that?" You can find links and read their wonky report here: http://www.aarp.org/home-family/caregiving/info-10-2012/home-alone-family-caregivers-providing-complex-chronic-care.html

What does this replacement of this unpaid mean, you might ask? Well this is the labor (mostly) women have to do to take care of their children, their elders, and their spouses unpaid and without any consideration for the contributions they make to their communities.

How does this unpaid work contribute to my community or to me, you might ask? Well YOU would be expected to pay that $1/2 Trillion yearly more to build, maintain, and staff facilities in order for someone abandoning their loved ones in order to work for a wage.

(Mostly)women LOSE almost $400,000 over a work lifetime due to this labor according to the AARP and other labor studies.

Social Security calls those years of unpaid care giving "zero years" for the 3 to 5 times in their lifetime (mostly) women make the agonizing decision whether to care for a loved one or work for a wage. This means women who choose to care for this loved one will not be eligible for any pension or Social Security benefits.

If women choose this unpaid labor in order to care for their loved ones, they are most often forced to live off the income of the loved one for the 24/7 unpaid labor that gives them zero benefits such as sick leave, vacation, unemployment benefits, medical benefits or retirement. If they were compensated with a wage according to labor and this AARP study, she would be paid upwards of $137,000 per year for the various tasks she performs such as chauffeuring, cooking, house work, nursing,childcare, elder care, physical therapy, household shopping, and various other tasks that would cost far more of they were sourced out.

Welfare insists that women go back to work when their infant is 3 months old. For a women with a newborn to work for a wage at their McJob, she will make at most $1000 per month while the cost to taxpayers is over $2000 per month for infant daycare alone. Other Over 70% of the McJobs they are forced to work are off hours, evenings, weekends and the like when childcare is nonexistent and if it does exist (my city has ONE off hour daycare at this time) it costs much more. Additional daycare for older potty trained kids can cost from $500-1000 per child per month, also tax paid. For the paid worker, this does not include all the other extra costs they may need such as transportation to work, career clothing, etc. At this time taxpayers subsidize much of this while the McJob yields less than $1000 per month, in essence subsidizing corporations over $4000 more per month so they can pay this McWage.

In contrast if these women were given financial support in order to care for their loved ones, it would cost about $1200 per month, and this includes housing assistance, medical for herself and her kids, and food assistance. If her loved one is an elder or spouse who needs assistance so she can work for a wage, facilities costs could soar to upwards of $8000 per month.

The point is that we seem to "forget" all this unpaid labor that is saving us $Trillions and yet is often not even considered "work". If we were smart, which most of us are not if we do not see this work as worthy, we would realize we would not be burdened with these corporate subsidies, it cost less that 1/5th of what we are paying now to support unpaid labor and give far more stability to families.

My 2 cents (and I have more stats and information)

Cat in Seattle
Board member of P.O.W.E.R http://www.mamapower.org