Since the U.S. won tougher sanctions against North Korea at the UN Security Council this past year, the mood has been busy. The North Korean's busied themselves with building the most modern nuclear enrichment facility ever. In response, U.S. busied itself with ignoring North Korea. North Korea has not been "too terribly taken" with this approach. So earlier this week it salvoed 175 rounds of artillery at an innocent little South Korean fishing Village, killing two South Korean Marines.
Thus far North Korea continues to commit the tactic of throwing child like tantrums screaming "you can't keep ignoring us."
To which President Obama responds, "Yes we can!"
Although admittedly, we will now be ignoring you from much closer range. As we are about to park the nimitz-class super carrier U.S.S. George Washington on your front door step.
Note to North Korea "Yes We Can" ignore you. Also, you should consider us ignoring you a gift because god help you once we decide to stop ignoring you!
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
What Dayton got Right!
Dayton
- Self financed
- Spot on Political Messaging to the Exact Constituency
- Focus on Seniors
- Focus on NE MN (Iron Range)
- He even picked a "Ranger" for Lt. Governor
- 'Known Political Entity'
- High Name ID
- “Tax the Rich” Closest concept to budget solution
- Easy to understand
- Populist Msg
- Personally / Politically Expedient
- He told what he would protect…Education
- Connected tax increases to education
- A concept that works for most Minnesotan's
- "Ill gladly pay more taxes if it means a better education"
-
- This analysis presented as what Dayton got right to win a majority of DFL Primary voters and does not represent any indication as to whether Practical Politician or its authors agree with the content or viability of said arguments, philosophies, or political rhetoric.
Monday, August 9, 2010
First Lady’s Spain Vacation Draws Criticism
Plain and simple. The criticism of the First Lady taking a vacation is unwarranted from my prospective. If she wants to fly to her daughter and close friends to Spain, who am I to comment or criticize. She is a private citizen, she has every right. As to the costs, well the costs could be the same even if she did choose the some spot in the U.S. For example, when the Obama's fly from DC to Hawaii that flight is further and presumably costs more than a trip to Spain.
Give it up chronic complainers!
August 6, 2010
First Lady’s Spain Vacation Draws Criticism
By PETER BAKER and RAPHAEL MINDER
WASHINGTON — There is nothing like a little Mediterranean beach vacation to unwind. Unless you happen to travel with dozens of Secret Service agents, trailed by photographers and dogged by controversy.
Michelle Obama hoped to enjoy a quiet summer break in southern Spain with her younger daughter and a few friends. But the Andalusian getaway has gotten away from her as the European media document her every flamenco dance step and critics back home question the wisdom of such a lavish vacation, which involves at least some taxpayer money, in a time of austerity.
As Mrs. Obama and her entourage toured the picturesque southern city of Ronda on Saturday, the blogosphere has been filled with commentary about what many saw as a tone-deaf trip in the same week the United States reported the loss of 131,000 more jobs. “A modern-day Marie Antoinette,” scolded a New York Daily News columnist.
The White House was reluctant to discuss Mrs. Obama’s trip. The only official comment came from Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, at a briefing last week when he said that Mrs. Obama “is a private citizen and is the mother of a daughter on a private trip. And I think I’d leave it at that.”
Privately, officials note that the first lady is paying for her own room, food and transportation, and the friends she brought will pay for theirs as well. The government pays for security, and the Secret Service, not the first lady, determines what is needed.
Officials said some reports of the trip had been exaggerated. Mrs. Obama is not traveling with 40 friends, one official said, but with two friends and four of their daughters, as well as a couple of aides and a couple of advance staff members. The staff is with her because she will pay a courtesy call on King Juan Carlos and Queen Sofía on the island of Majorca on Sunday before flying home to Washington.
Every first lady in modern times has flown on government planes with a sizable security detail, and it is hard to pinpoint the cost to taxpayers. The Air Force jet she flew costs $11,351 per hour to operate, according to several reports, meaning a 14-hour round trip would cost nearly $160,000. The first lady would reimburse only the equivalent of first-class commercial tickets for herself and her daughter Sasha, the rest of the seats being occupied mainly by Secret Service. Officials said their friends flew on separate commercial flights.
Laura Bush took vacations without her husband each year of George W. Bush’s presidency, traveling with her Secret Service detail on a government plane to meet friends for camping in national parks. But that never generated as much furor, in part because vacationing in the United States is not as politically delicate for American leaders and their families as doing so in foreign countries.
The Obama family traveled to Acadia National Park in Maine in July and plans to spend time in the Gulf of Mexico and on Martha’s Vineyard this month.
“It’s always very difficult to lead a private life when you’re a public person,” said Anita McBride, who was Mrs. Bush’s chief of staff. “No one would deny any of our hard-working public officials an opportunity for a vacation. Everybody needs that. But I think the more expensive or lavish a trip might be perceived, the more criticism you invite.”
While some Americans frown, the Spanish eagerly welcomed the Obama group, seeing it as a boost for a tourism sector severely hit by the country’s economic downturn. Since her landing at Málaga’s airport on Wednesday, Spanish media have covered the first lady’s trip almost minute by minute, from a tour of the Alhambra palace to a stop at an ice cream shop.
Their Andalusian stay was to end Saturday night with a charity dinner organized and attended by celebrities like Eva Longoria Parker and Antonio Banderas.
Mrs. Obama and friends have been staying at the five-star Hotel Villa Padierna near Marbella, where at least 30 rooms were reserved for the entourage, including those for security. The hotel is one of Spain’s more luxurious establishments, with rooms ranging from $500-a-night to a $6,600 suite with 24-hour butler service.
The Spanish excitement grew so much that the media reported one study claiming the publicity from her visit would be worth $1 billion for a country. The attention has gotten so intense that the Spanish newspaper El País chastised local authorities for showing a “puerile enthusiasm” for the visit.
Peter Baker reported from Washington, and Raphael Minder from Madrid.
Give it up chronic complainers!
August 6, 2010
First Lady’s Spain Vacation Draws Criticism
By PETER BAKER and RAPHAEL MINDER
WASHINGTON — There is nothing like a little Mediterranean beach vacation to unwind. Unless you happen to travel with dozens of Secret Service agents, trailed by photographers and dogged by controversy.
Michelle Obama hoped to enjoy a quiet summer break in southern Spain with her younger daughter and a few friends. But the Andalusian getaway has gotten away from her as the European media document her every flamenco dance step and critics back home question the wisdom of such a lavish vacation, which involves at least some taxpayer money, in a time of austerity.
As Mrs. Obama and her entourage toured the picturesque southern city of Ronda on Saturday, the blogosphere has been filled with commentary about what many saw as a tone-deaf trip in the same week the United States reported the loss of 131,000 more jobs. “A modern-day Marie Antoinette,” scolded a New York Daily News columnist.
The White House was reluctant to discuss Mrs. Obama’s trip. The only official comment came from Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, at a briefing last week when he said that Mrs. Obama “is a private citizen and is the mother of a daughter on a private trip. And I think I’d leave it at that.”
Privately, officials note that the first lady is paying for her own room, food and transportation, and the friends she brought will pay for theirs as well. The government pays for security, and the Secret Service, not the first lady, determines what is needed.
Officials said some reports of the trip had been exaggerated. Mrs. Obama is not traveling with 40 friends, one official said, but with two friends and four of their daughters, as well as a couple of aides and a couple of advance staff members. The staff is with her because she will pay a courtesy call on King Juan Carlos and Queen Sofía on the island of Majorca on Sunday before flying home to Washington.
Every first lady in modern times has flown on government planes with a sizable security detail, and it is hard to pinpoint the cost to taxpayers. The Air Force jet she flew costs $11,351 per hour to operate, according to several reports, meaning a 14-hour round trip would cost nearly $160,000. The first lady would reimburse only the equivalent of first-class commercial tickets for herself and her daughter Sasha, the rest of the seats being occupied mainly by Secret Service. Officials said their friends flew on separate commercial flights.
Laura Bush took vacations without her husband each year of George W. Bush’s presidency, traveling with her Secret Service detail on a government plane to meet friends for camping in national parks. But that never generated as much furor, in part because vacationing in the United States is not as politically delicate for American leaders and their families as doing so in foreign countries.
The Obama family traveled to Acadia National Park in Maine in July and plans to spend time in the Gulf of Mexico and on Martha’s Vineyard this month.
“It’s always very difficult to lead a private life when you’re a public person,” said Anita McBride, who was Mrs. Bush’s chief of staff. “No one would deny any of our hard-working public officials an opportunity for a vacation. Everybody needs that. But I think the more expensive or lavish a trip might be perceived, the more criticism you invite.”
While some Americans frown, the Spanish eagerly welcomed the Obama group, seeing it as a boost for a tourism sector severely hit by the country’s economic downturn. Since her landing at Málaga’s airport on Wednesday, Spanish media have covered the first lady’s trip almost minute by minute, from a tour of the Alhambra palace to a stop at an ice cream shop.
Their Andalusian stay was to end Saturday night with a charity dinner organized and attended by celebrities like Eva Longoria Parker and Antonio Banderas.
Mrs. Obama and friends have been staying at the five-star Hotel Villa Padierna near Marbella, where at least 30 rooms were reserved for the entourage, including those for security. The hotel is one of Spain’s more luxurious establishments, with rooms ranging from $500-a-night to a $6,600 suite with 24-hour butler service.
The Spanish excitement grew so much that the media reported one study claiming the publicity from her visit would be worth $1 billion for a country. The attention has gotten so intense that the Spanish newspaper El País chastised local authorities for showing a “puerile enthusiasm” for the visit.
Peter Baker reported from Washington, and Raphael Minder from Madrid.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Simple Politics of Citizen's United
Union Dues Dollars and Corporate Revenues, What's the difference?
Lost in the objections to Citizen's United is the fact that the unions have long since been able to raise PAC money directly from union dues which comes directly from union members paycheck without any choice. Citizens United argues that corporations should be given the same right to free speech through contributions. Arguing, that unions and corporations alike are really just organized individuals! Hard to argue with that kind of logic, unless you are a Democrat and are facing losing your long held competitive advantage!
Democrats want to squash the decision, striking tones of the tryanny of large corporate evils, reinforce any residual pangs of populism, and paint the Republicans as purveyors of excessive corporate influence pedaling. Meanwhile simultaneously reserving the right to use union raised dues dollars for both hard and soft money purposes.
Republicans want the opinion affirmed, striking tones of fairness, evoking the constitution and widely applying what would otherwise be an individual right to that of the many.
Q. If Unions are a collection of Individuals than how are Corporations different?
Q. How would you decide?
Lost in the objections to Citizen's United is the fact that the unions have long since been able to raise PAC money directly from union dues which comes directly from union members paycheck without any choice. Citizens United argues that corporations should be given the same right to free speech through contributions. Arguing, that unions and corporations alike are really just organized individuals! Hard to argue with that kind of logic, unless you are a Democrat and are facing losing your long held competitive advantage!
Democrats want to squash the decision, striking tones of the tryanny of large corporate evils, reinforce any residual pangs of populism, and paint the Republicans as purveyors of excessive corporate influence pedaling. Meanwhile simultaneously reserving the right to use union raised dues dollars for both hard and soft money purposes.
Republicans want the opinion affirmed, striking tones of fairness, evoking the constitution and widely applying what would otherwise be an individual right to that of the many.
Q. If Unions are a collection of Individuals than how are Corporations different?
Q. How would you decide?
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Health Care Reform Passes -- What's in the Bill?
Cost:
* $940 billion over ten years.
Deficit:
*
Would reduce the deficit by $143 billion over the first ten years. That is an updated CBO estimate. Their first preliminary estimate said it would reduce the deficit by $130 billion over ten years. Would reduce the deficit by $1.2 billion dollars in the second ten years.
Read more on the CBO Report
Coverage:
* Would expand coverage to 32 million Americans who are currently uninsured.
Health Insurance Exchanges:
* The uninsured and self-employed would be able to purchase insurance through state-based exchanges with subsidies available to individuals and families with income between the 133 percent and 400 percent of poverty level.
* Separate exchanges would be created for small businesses to purchase coverage -- effective 2014.
* Funding available to states to establish exchanges within one year of enactment and until January 1, 2015.
Subsidies:
* Individuals and families who make between 100 percent - 400 percent of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) and want to purchase their own health insurance on an exchange are eligible for subsidies. They cannot be eligible for Medicare, Medicaid and cannot be covered by an employer. Eligible buyers receive premium credits and there is a cap for how much they have to contribute to their premiums on a sliding scale.
Federal Poverty Level for family of four is $22,050
Paying for the Plan:
* Medicare Payroll tax on investment income -- Starting in 2012, the Medicare Payroll Tax will be expanded to include unearned income. That will be a 3.8 percent tax on investment income for families making more than $250,000 per year ($200,000 for individuals).
* Excise Tax -- Beginning in 2018, insurance companies will pay a 40 percent excise tax on so-called "Cadillac" high-end insurance plans worth over $27,500 for families ($10,200 for individuals). Dental and vision plans are exempt and will not be counted in the total cost of a family's plan.
* Tanning Tax -- 10 percent excise tax on indoor tanning services.
Medicare:
* Closes the Medicare prescription drug "donut hole" by 2020. Seniors who hit the donut hole by 2010 will receive a $250 rebate.
* Beginning in 2011, seniors in the gap will receive a 50 percent discount on brand name drugs. The bill also includes $500 billion in Medicare cuts over the next decade.
Medicaid:
* Expands Medicaid to include 133 percent of federal poverty level which is $29,327 for a family of four.
* Requires states to expand Medicaid to include childless adults starting in 2014.
* Federal Government pays 100 percent of costs for covering newly eligible individuals through 2016.
* Illegal immigrants are not eligible for Medicaid.
Insurance Reforms:
* Six months after enactment, insurance companies could no longer denying children coverage based on a preexisting condition.
* Starting in 2014, insurance companies cannot deny coverage to anyone with preexisting conditions.
* Insurance companies must allow children to stay on their parent's insurance plans through age 26.
Abortion:
* The bill segregates private insurance premium funds from taxpayer funds. Individuals would have to pay for abortion coverage by making two separate payments, private funds would have to be kept in a separate account from federal and taxpayer funds.
* No health care plan would be required to offer abortion coverage. States could pass legislation choosing to opt out of offering abortion coverage through the exchange.
**Separately, anti-abortion Democrats worked out language with the White House on an executive order that would state that no federal funds can be used to pay for abortions except in the case of rape, incest or health of the mother. (Read more here)
Individual Mandate:
* In 2014, everyone must purchase health insurance or face a $695 annual fine. There are some exceptions for low-income people.
Employer Mandate:
* Technically, there is no employer mandate. Employers with more than 50 employees must provide health insurance or pay a fine of $2000 per worker each year if any worker receives federal subsidies to purchase health insurance. Fines applied to entire number of employees minus some allowances.
Immigration:
* Illegal immigrants will not be allowed to buy health insurance in the exchanges -- even if they pay completely with their own money.
* $940 billion over ten years.
Deficit:
*
Would reduce the deficit by $143 billion over the first ten years. That is an updated CBO estimate. Their first preliminary estimate said it would reduce the deficit by $130 billion over ten years. Would reduce the deficit by $1.2 billion dollars in the second ten years.
Read more on the CBO Report
Coverage:
* Would expand coverage to 32 million Americans who are currently uninsured.
Health Insurance Exchanges:
* The uninsured and self-employed would be able to purchase insurance through state-based exchanges with subsidies available to individuals and families with income between the 133 percent and 400 percent of poverty level.
* Separate exchanges would be created for small businesses to purchase coverage -- effective 2014.
* Funding available to states to establish exchanges within one year of enactment and until January 1, 2015.
Subsidies:
* Individuals and families who make between 100 percent - 400 percent of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) and want to purchase their own health insurance on an exchange are eligible for subsidies. They cannot be eligible for Medicare, Medicaid and cannot be covered by an employer. Eligible buyers receive premium credits and there is a cap for how much they have to contribute to their premiums on a sliding scale.
Federal Poverty Level for family of four is $22,050
Paying for the Plan:
* Medicare Payroll tax on investment income -- Starting in 2012, the Medicare Payroll Tax will be expanded to include unearned income. That will be a 3.8 percent tax on investment income for families making more than $250,000 per year ($200,000 for individuals).
* Excise Tax -- Beginning in 2018, insurance companies will pay a 40 percent excise tax on so-called "Cadillac" high-end insurance plans worth over $27,500 for families ($10,200 for individuals). Dental and vision plans are exempt and will not be counted in the total cost of a family's plan.
* Tanning Tax -- 10 percent excise tax on indoor tanning services.
Medicare:
* Closes the Medicare prescription drug "donut hole" by 2020. Seniors who hit the donut hole by 2010 will receive a $250 rebate.
* Beginning in 2011, seniors in the gap will receive a 50 percent discount on brand name drugs. The bill also includes $500 billion in Medicare cuts over the next decade.
Medicaid:
* Expands Medicaid to include 133 percent of federal poverty level which is $29,327 for a family of four.
* Requires states to expand Medicaid to include childless adults starting in 2014.
* Federal Government pays 100 percent of costs for covering newly eligible individuals through 2016.
* Illegal immigrants are not eligible for Medicaid.
Insurance Reforms:
* Six months after enactment, insurance companies could no longer denying children coverage based on a preexisting condition.
* Starting in 2014, insurance companies cannot deny coverage to anyone with preexisting conditions.
* Insurance companies must allow children to stay on their parent's insurance plans through age 26.
Abortion:
* The bill segregates private insurance premium funds from taxpayer funds. Individuals would have to pay for abortion coverage by making two separate payments, private funds would have to be kept in a separate account from federal and taxpayer funds.
* No health care plan would be required to offer abortion coverage. States could pass legislation choosing to opt out of offering abortion coverage through the exchange.
**Separately, anti-abortion Democrats worked out language with the White House on an executive order that would state that no federal funds can be used to pay for abortions except in the case of rape, incest or health of the mother. (Read more here)
Individual Mandate:
* In 2014, everyone must purchase health insurance or face a $695 annual fine. There are some exceptions for low-income people.
Employer Mandate:
* Technically, there is no employer mandate. Employers with more than 50 employees must provide health insurance or pay a fine of $2000 per worker each year if any worker receives federal subsidies to purchase health insurance. Fines applied to entire number of employees minus some allowances.
Immigration:
* Illegal immigrants will not be allowed to buy health insurance in the exchanges -- even if they pay completely with their own money.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Governor Pawlenty ‘Line Item Vetoes’ Bonding Bill
Perspective
The governor originally called for a bonding bill not to exceed $725 million. The DFL legislature passed two bonding bills this session but through procedural maneuvering only sent the most recent on for presentment, the process that allows a Governor to formally act on legislation.
Governor Pawlenty delivered, as expected, on a promise to cut back the bonding bill by exercising his ‘line-item veto’ authority. As an aside, this is one gubernatorial authority that nobody questions as opposed to another battle that begins today—unallotment authority. But I digress, as this is an issue for another day. The bill as presented was larger than $1 Billion and the Governor has paired the bill down to $680, below even his threshold limit. The Governor cut from infrastructure projects in areas such as Community Colleges, Coon Rapids Dam, Public Housing, Trails, and other projects of regional significance. Not to be missed was the Governor’s ability to successfully implore the legislature to re-insert some of his own priorities including funding for sex offender lock-up facilities.
Proponents of each project will likely decry the lack of commitment to certain priorities by offering the proverbial “This is the time to bond and build,” indicating a preference for spending while the cost of borrowed money is cheapest. Additionally, expect post line item veto rhetoric to include quips about “lost opportunities on shovel ready projects.” Meanwhile, the republican responsorial will be “living within your means” and having the fiscal discipline to say no. The often invoked mantra is “it’s like charging up your credit cards, when you are flat broke.” Democrats will contend the Governor unfairly retaliated on projects in key Democratic strongholds. Though, Republicans will point out that Democrats loaded the bill with “Christmas presents” for those same constituencies.
As is often the case, the truth lies somewhere in between. No one can deny that bonding is relatively inexpensive in today’s economic environment. Yet, fiscal prudence requires restraint and an eye towards maintaining Minnesota’s bonding rating and not burdening future budgets with excess debt service obligations. So ultimately it comes down to balancing these competing priorities. Might I suggest that despite all the maneuvering, grandstanding, and political showmanship, an unfortunate side effect much like any modern era legend drug, the process actually worked as intended? How refreshing?
For a complete listing of vetoed items SEE LINK
http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/Vetoes/veto_results.asp?veto_id=529
The governor originally called for a bonding bill not to exceed $725 million. The DFL legislature passed two bonding bills this session but through procedural maneuvering only sent the most recent on for presentment, the process that allows a Governor to formally act on legislation.
Governor Pawlenty delivered, as expected, on a promise to cut back the bonding bill by exercising his ‘line-item veto’ authority. As an aside, this is one gubernatorial authority that nobody questions as opposed to another battle that begins today—unallotment authority. But I digress, as this is an issue for another day. The bill as presented was larger than $1 Billion and the Governor has paired the bill down to $680, below even his threshold limit. The Governor cut from infrastructure projects in areas such as Community Colleges, Coon Rapids Dam, Public Housing, Trails, and other projects of regional significance. Not to be missed was the Governor’s ability to successfully implore the legislature to re-insert some of his own priorities including funding for sex offender lock-up facilities.
Proponents of each project will likely decry the lack of commitment to certain priorities by offering the proverbial “This is the time to bond and build,” indicating a preference for spending while the cost of borrowed money is cheapest. Additionally, expect post line item veto rhetoric to include quips about “lost opportunities on shovel ready projects.” Meanwhile, the republican responsorial will be “living within your means” and having the fiscal discipline to say no. The often invoked mantra is “it’s like charging up your credit cards, when you are flat broke.” Democrats will contend the Governor unfairly retaliated on projects in key Democratic strongholds. Though, Republicans will point out that Democrats loaded the bill with “Christmas presents” for those same constituencies.
As is often the case, the truth lies somewhere in between. No one can deny that bonding is relatively inexpensive in today’s economic environment. Yet, fiscal prudence requires restraint and an eye towards maintaining Minnesota’s bonding rating and not burdening future budgets with excess debt service obligations. So ultimately it comes down to balancing these competing priorities. Might I suggest that despite all the maneuvering, grandstanding, and political showmanship, an unfortunate side effect much like any modern era legend drug, the process actually worked as intended? How refreshing?
For a complete listing of vetoed items SEE LINK
http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/Vetoes/veto_results.asp?veto_id=529
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)