Government of the People -- Without Congress

This post is no far-right tea party diatribe. But it is a statement of relief. The government at Washington still lives, as James Garfield once famously said after the Lincoln assassination tragedy. But so do the people live on -- and now without Congress as that august body is in August recess.

It's not that I disesteem the institution of Congress. In fact I do value it highly in the purpose and intent for which it was designed -- as the premiere branch of government, doing the people's business.

Instead, my observation is a simple one. Even with no Congress in session, the country seems to do quite well, perhaps better than before.

Still, returning to the previous caveat. And now with a qualifier of a more partisan nature. Unlike many, my relief is the absence of the scorching, seering and sneering ravings and rantings of nihilistic nabobs of negativism careening through the right-wing halls of Congress. The silence is sweet indeed. Suddenly there is no more the voice of Boehner and Ryan. Neither are there Cantor nor McConnell.

So for small favors we give thanks, O Lord. And in this case, I really do believe the Almighty is not slighted by being Himself associated with Relief.

Chinese Express Criticism of Own Team

It was heartening today to learn that many Chinese citizens had criticisms of their own basketball team for their poor behavior in an exhibition match with the team from Georgetown University on a goodwill tour of the land of Confucius. It seems there may have been faults on both sides, but the Chinese team evidently has a reputation of being aggressive.

So, it was encouraging and edifying to see the Chinese expressing displeasure with their own nation's team. Perhaps we can learn something from these thoughtful persons.


Source: The New York Times on line.

Bill Clinton Calls Perry a Rascal, Albeit a Good-Looking One

Former Pres. Bill Clinton had some choice words yesterday on the subject of new candidate, Rick Perry. “I got tickled by watching Governor Perry announce for governor, for President. He’s a good looking rascal.” The remark drew laughter from the audience at a fire fighters' convention.

Clinton continued: “And he’s saying ‘Oh, I’m going to Washington to make sure that the federal government stays as far away from you as possible -– while I ride on Air Force One and that Marine One helicopter and go to Camp David and travel around the world and have a good time.’ I mean, this is crazy.”

Agreed, Mr. President.


Source: Observer.com

James Galbraith Describes the Real Barack Obama

In this article on the web site of Deutsche Welle, American economist James Galbraith gives a fascinating and accurate assessment of the politics of the true Barack Obama. The honesty here is breath-taking, never mean-spirited, but biting nonetheless.

There is talk of impeachment over the Libya air bombing campaign (a strong case) and the so-called "Super Congress" (not as strong a case, but still important). Far more deserving of impeachment was George W. Bush. But in his own way, Mr. Obama has furthered the aims of the world's over-stimulated financial houses.



http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,15295143,00.htm

Recent Union Victories Bring Good News to a Beleagured Public

At the link shown below, Truthout presents an article detailing several union organizing victories over the past several months.

I agree there is a new spirit in the air. There is a realization that things are out of control and that the federal government, including Pres. Obama and Congress, is not stepping up to the plate.

Union organizers on the street, however, have succeeded in bringing a bit of relief to weary workers.

(Article contains a word of praise for the newly-re-constituted National Labor Relations Board.)



http://www.truth-out.org/8-union-victories-progressives-should-be-watching-and-learning/1313160895

Wisconsin Recall Results Expected to Re-cast Wisconsin Legislative Politics

State Sen.-Elect Jennifer Shilling of Wisconsin

"On Tuesday night, Wisconsin spoke loud and clear with the recall of two entrenched Republicans. This is an accomplishment of historic proportions...," said Democratic Party of Wisconsin chair Tate.

To be brief on this occasion --

As writer John Nichols explains, there is more than meets the eye in the battle for control of the Wisconsin legislative and political agenda. With two new Democratic seats and a newly-emboldened moderate Republican, the outcome of efforts by far-right Wisconsin governor, Scott Walker, to weaken unions in the state, is suddenly far from certain.

King Memorial to Be Dedicated

The Washington Post reported today that ceremonies dedicating the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial will be held on August 28 in the nation's capital. The date is the 48th anniversary of King's famous "I Have a Dream Speech" at the Lincoln Memorial.

There are more details at the memorial foundation's web site: dedicatethedream.org .

Former Special Agent Reveals Lead-Up to September 2001 Events

From Veterans Today --

Special to THE MUSICAL PATRIOT


The Missing Security Tapes from the World Trade Center

by Susan Lindauer, former U.S. Asset and 9/11 Whistleblower


Late on the night of August 23, 2001, at about 3 a.m. security cameras in the parking garage of the World Trade Center captured the arrival of two or three truck vans.

Visual examination determined the vans were separate and unique from trucks used by janitorial services, including different colors and devoid of markings. More curious, all the janitorial trucks had pulled out of the Towers by about 2:30 a.m—about half an hour before the second set of vans arrived.

According to my high level State Department source with a top security clearance, who disclosed the unusual nightly activity, no vans matching that description had entered the World Trade Center at such an hour in any of the weeks or months prior to that date. It was a unique event.

Security cameras caught the vans leaving the Towers at approximately 5 a.m—before the first wave of AAA personality types on Wall Street, driving Mercedes and BMWs, arrived to track the markets.

For the next 10 to 12 nights, the same mysterious truck vans arrived at the World Trade Center at the same mysterious hour— after the janitorial crews had left the building and before the most fanatic robber barons on Wall Street showed up for work. The vans appeared at the World Trade Center from approximately August 23, 2001 until September 3 or 4, 2001. After that last night, they never appeared at the Towers again.

The vans were never heard of again, either. The 9/11 Commission was never informed of their surprising presence in the Towers three weeks before the 9/11 attack. Most of the 9/11 Truth Community has no knowledge of this extraordinary nightly activity, either.

For all the public’s ignorance, video from the security cameras could be the most significant missing part of the 9/11 puzzle. This State Department source was convinced the mysterious trucks were used to transport explosives into the building, and that an unidentified orphan team wired the World Trade Center for a controlled demolition in those late night hours. He has stayed quiet to protect his job, his retirement pension and his reputation—knowing that others who spoke up have gotten fired or thrown in prison (myself included).

Controlled Demolition

Other evidence supports a controlled demolition of the Towers, as a supplement to the hijackings. Firefighters and maintenance crews reported hearing explosions popping through the Towers on 9/11. And previous reports indicate that dust from the World Trade Center tested positive for “thermate explosives–” a derivative of a thermite bomb.

A thermite reaction involves a mixture of iron oxide and aluminum, while thermate adds an element of sulfur. When the iron oxide-aluminum mixture is ignited, a super vigorous reaction occurs, creating molten metal—and dust, in the case of thermate. The reaction is extremely exothermic, meaning that a great deal of heat is given off, making for an incredibly powerful reducing agent.

Even so, as the 10 year anniversary of the 9/11 attack approaches, the majority of Americans continue to be confused as to how a controlled demolition scenario fits with the airplane hijackings and aerial strike on the World Trade Center—which the whole world witnessed on play back over and over in the media, until the image was seared like a brand on our collective consciousness.

Until now, there has been a false dichotomy that only one or the other style of attack could have occurred, but never both together. Some parts of the 9/11 Community itself vigorously dispute that both could have occurred as synchronized events. And most of the corporate media refuses to acknowledge the controlled demolition theory whatsoever.

When the public understands 9/11 as a series of Real Time events throughout the month of August, 2001, the unfolding sequence of this tragedy makes a lot more sense.

The difficulty is throwing out everything the public has been taught about 9/11—created for the convenience of politicians and corporate media, who simplified the story for public consumption.

First and foremost, contrary to all media reports and official claims, U.S. and foreign intelligence absolutely expected the 9/11 attack to occur— citing airplane hijackings and a strike on the World Trade Center. Even the time frame was identified precisely—known to be late August through mid-September.

I relate here my own experience as evidence. It has been corroborated in courtroom testimony by Parke Godfrey, a computer science professor at York University in Toronto. He delivered his statement under oath in the Federal Courthouse of the Southern District of New York—1000 yards from where the World Trade Center once graced the skyline.

On August 2, the date of Robert Mueller’s Senate confirmation hearings to become Director of the FBI, my CIA handler, Dr. Richard Fuisz warned me not to travel to New York because the attack on the World Trade Center involving airplane hijackings was “considered imminent,” with the potential for “mass human casualties” and a “possible miniature thermo-nuclear device” (thermite).

Our team aggressively tried to block the conspiracy. But not everyone was on board.

Threats to Iraq

As far back as April and May of 2001, a decision had been made at the top levels of the government that War with Iraq would be in play in the aftermath of a 9/11 scenario.

As the primary Asset covering the Iraqi Embassy in New York, I myself was ordered to threaten Iraqi diplomats with War, if it was determined that Iraq possessed actionable intelligence about the airplane hijacking conspiracy and failed to hand it over through my back channel.

After initially balking at the message, I was informed the threat originated at the highest level of government, above the CIA Director and Secretary of State. That could only be President George Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

Iraqi diplomats threw up their hands: They had nothing to give us, they said. But go ahead, they told me. “Send your FBI. They are welcome in Baghdad. We want peace with America. And maybe they will find something.” For all the brouhaha after 9/11, the fact remains that George Bush took no action on Iraq’s invite.

There was chatter about the 9/11 conspiracy throughout the Intelligence Community all summer long. The greatest part of the Intelligence Community abhorred the scenario. My own Intelligence team, triangulating the CIA and Defense Intelligence Agency pushed and pushed for actionable intelligence from Baghdad. However, though we could not understand what the hell was going on, our efforts kept running into a wall of interference from the Justice Department, with only superficial outward support.

For the integrity of history, Americans and the world community have a fundamental right to understand what actions the Intelligence Community did undertake prior to the attack—because it exposes the high level opposition running interference.

August Timeline

On Thursday, August 2, 2001— my CIA handler, Dr. Richard Fuisz and I discussed over the telephone our belief that the attack would be imminent.

On Saturday, August 4– I visited the Iraqi Embassy in New York for the final time before 9/11, pushing for any fragment of actionable intelligence from Baghdad that could pinpoint the conspiracy.

On the weekend of August 4-5—spooky NSA types “visited” the office where I had a part time consulting job. Of course the office was closed for the weekend, and I won’t speculate how they got inside. However, while snooping, they took a “proof of life,” for want of a better expression. It is a physical copy of the Wall Street Journal dated July 30, 2001—the same week as my conversation with Dr. Fuisz— addressed to the company, with the street address and name of the man I had been working for.

The copy of the July 30, 2001 Wall Street Journal surfaced on my desk at home—Nine Years after the attack— while I was traveling in Japan on a speaking tour for the advance release of my book, “Extreme Prejudice: The Terrifying Story of the Patriot Act and the Cover Ups of 9/11 and Iraq,” which features a detailed analysis of our team’s 9/11 warnings, the 9/11 investigation and a comprehensive peace framework developed with Iraqi diplomats. Given the upheaval in my life throughout the intervening decade—including a year’s stint in prison on a Texas military base, while the government covered up my team’s 9/11 warnings and the true facts of Iraqi Pre-War Intelligence— there’s no way a copy of the Wall Street Journal could have survived as desk clutter.

Other Intelligence officers will recognize the significance at once. That hard copy of the Wall Street Journal proves beyond any question that other spooks were tracking our team’s conversations about the conspiracy in “real time” fully 6 weeks before 9/11 occurred. A newspaper would have been thrown out of an office weeks before the attack. Somebody had to grab it up almost immediately after my conversation with Dr. Fuisz.

See? Other teams tried to put together the attack scenario, too.

All of it points to the frenetic activity in advance of 9/11. There was a lot of action behind the scenes. And Intelligence folk are anything but passive individuals. Quite the opposite, there’s a lot of creative risk-taking and proactive problem solving. None of these people sit on their hands.

Americans still don’t know that:

On Monday, August 6, I met with Dr. Fuisz and we hammered out a plan of action for alerting the White House that this hijacking conspiracy should move to “emergency status.”

That same Monday, August 6, the CIA handed President Bush a memo warning about an expected terrorist conspiracy involving Al Qaeda. Though I could be mistaken, I have always believed Dr. Fuisz contributed to that report. If not, it proves again that a broad spectrum of U.S. intelligence was moving to high alert status, far enough in advance to block the attack.

Following instructions from Dr. Fuisz, on Tuesday, August 7 or Wednesday, August 8, I placed an emergency call to the private staff of Attorney General John Ashcroft. Identifying myself as the Chief U.S. Intelligence Asset covering Iraq and Libya at the United Nations, I delivered our warning about a conspiracy involving airplane hijackings and a targeted strike on the World Trade Center.

I requested an emergency broadcast alert through all Federal Agencies seeking any fragment of intelligence involving airplane hijackings and a strike on the World Trade Center. I warned the attack was “imminent” with expectations of “mass casualties,” and that it should be regarded as Emergency Status.

Attorney General John Ashcroft’s private staff immediately gave me a telephone number at the Office of Counter-Terrorism, and told me to repeat what I had just told them to the person at that number. Immediately I complied.

Later that week on August 9 or 10, I drove over to the Arlington, Virginia home of my second cousin, Andrew Card— Chief of Staff to President George Bush— ready to deliver the same message. I waited two hours in my car outside of his home. Occasionally neighbors peeked outside their curtains, while I chain smoked cigarettes in the hot car. (Yes, I have quit smoking.) Driving away, I remember thinking that I might be making the greatest mistake of my life.

My Own Private Hell during the Cover Up

I am extremely proud of our team efforts before 9/11 and throughout the 9/11 investigation. For all that, Americans are learning about this very late because I got into great big, bad trouble with the Feds when I tried to talk. I suffered five (5) years of indictment on the Patriot Act and one year of prison on a military base without a trial, when Republicans decided to reinvent the facts about 9/11 and Iraqi Pre-War Intelligence, denying Iraq’s contributions to the 9/11 investigation and the existence of a comprehensive peace framework.

Our relationship soured as I became convinced Republicans at the top echelons allowed 9/11 to happen, killing thousands of innocent Americans and international citizens, so they could build a phony case for War against Iraq and Afghanistan.

I was outraged that the American government has done this to itself—as a pretext for military aggression and massive deficit spending in support of the military industrial complex, which is bankrupting the Middle Class. And I was quite vocal in expressing my belief that Americans have a right to full disclosure about our activities before 9/11 and the Iraqi War. And the devil take politicians!

Without question I posed a grave threat to political grandstanding on 9/11 and the myth of Washington’s “outstanding leadership performance on terrorism.” Many times I have thought of myself as Dorothy in the Land of Oz pulling back the curtain on the Wizard, and exposing his deceit before the hapless, trusting Munchkins.

In truth, the spooks did a great job before 9/11. Everything moved with lightning speed ahead of the threat. We could have stopped 9/11 easily if the Justice Department had fulfilled requests for inter-agency cooperation. There was plenty of time to alert NORAD or post an anti-air craft battery on top of the World Trade Center buildings.

That’s why the GOP leadership had to take me out—because I refused to back off that point. If I had been free, the American people and the world community would have learned the truth much sooner.

Controlled Demolition

Unhappily for all of us, because of private conversations with sources like my State Department colleague, I have reached additional conclusions that our team was not the only one at work before 9/11.

Though none of us expected this to happen, I have come to believe that our efforts collided with a force of equal resistance, in the form of an orphan team also watching the events unfolding like us.

As a long-time participant in multiple terrorism investigations, I have personal knowledge that most terrorist attacks are noisy, smoky and chaotic— without achieving maximum destruction of the target. The 1993 World Trade Center attack by Ramzi Youseff and Sheikh Abdul Rahmon of Egypt killed 5 people. The bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in the Port of Aden, Yemen killed 12 people. Without extra push, this 9/11 attack would never have killed so many people either—100 people at the very most.

Add to that a recipe of incompetent pilots— who functioned as Intelligence Assets themselves in a few cases— Again from personal experience, I know that Assets are heavily scrutinized at all times by handlers from multiple agencies. I am convinced that an inner circle anticipated the event, and saw that their boys flying those planes could not achieve maximum damage sufficient to achieve their War agenda in Iraq.

I cannot blame Americans for feeling overwhelmed, even heart-broken by these revelations. But bottom line jet fuel fires could not have collapsed both of those Towers, or Building 7, pretty much evaporating the entire steel frame of the buildings into dust and molten steel. Add to that the CIA’s urgent reports that a miniature thermo-nuclear device would be used in the attack—and that’s why I had to stay out of New York City.

The strange nightly activity at the World Trade Center three weeks before the attack clinched it for me. I am 100 percent convinced those Towers were wired for explosives.

Yes, hijacked airplanes struck the towers. But bringing down the Towers to secure War with Iraq required some extra umph.

I cannot speculate who wired the towers with explosives. I could make a guess, but my training as an Asset requires me to stay focused on what I have observed first-hand, and to recognize my own limitations.

So why should the world care? At this point, it is most critical for Americans to stop politicians in Washington from using 9/11 for grandstanding and personal ambitions. The War on Terrorism has perpetrated a fraud on all of us. Those who support the War on Terror are destroying our fiscal economy and our Middle Class.

That’s why Americans must learn the truth about 9/11. It’s reached a crisis point where we must get off this merry-go-round of defense spending. We must end the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Otherwise this fraud of 9/11 is going to ruin our great country for all time.

I only hope it isn’t too late already.


Used by Permission

The Battle for Washington

Once there was the battle over the debt ceiling. Now there is the battle for Washington itself, as interest groups on both sides attack the plan.

My sympathies lie with traditional Democrats who are rightfully outraged by planned cuts to social programs at just the time they are needed most. I also oppose this proposed "Super Committee," which will be an abdication on the part of the Congress, and may well be un-Constitutional.

Rep. Jerry Nadler of New York decries this deal in the following statement. I support Rep. Nadler in his disappointment and outrage.

“Defaulting on our debts is not an option. That’s why I voted for a clean debt ceiling increase, free from the unnecessary clutter of budgetary or other non-related matters. And that’s why I voted for Senator Reid’s plan this past Saturday, though parts of that plan were excessive and imbalanced. I am also the lead sponsor on a resolution to support the president’s use of Article 2, Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution to raise the debt ceiling – solely as a last resort. But this so-called compromise – “the Budget Control Act” – is just the latest blackmail request from extortionist Republicans.

“This legislation lays out an unbalanced, callous plan that will strangle the middle class and working poor, to say nothing of the elderly and kids. These blackmailers are telling the American people, ‘either you will accept deep cuts to vital programs that support seniors, students, children, women, and the poor, or we will force this nation to default on its debts’ – an unprecedented and reckless move that would lead to skyrocketing interest rates on mortgages, credit cards, student loans, and the like. So, either we stifle our economy and stymie job growth, or we kill the middle class and stymie job growth.

“Shockingly, while Republicans are holding us all hostage, telling us our country is broke and we have to cut programs that are lifelines to millions of Americans, they are letting the wealthiest among us – the corporations, millionaires, billionaires, and oil companies – off scot-free, without doing their fair share.
“This proposal is exactly the wrong thing at exactly the wrong time. With our economy still struggling and gasping for air, with more and more Americans looking for jobs, we should be promoting job growth and those federal and state programs that put people to work. But, instead of doing the things Americans do best – that is, building things and creating opportunity – Tea Partiers want to send this country over the cliff. We must say NO.”

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D -- New York)

More on the Debt Ceiling Hoax

As I have been saying here, the debt ceiling issue is essentially a hoax, as the Constitution creates a system in which the U.S. government has control over, and a responsibility for its debts. This means no private entity can control U.S. funds, though, under our system, financial institutions have indeed loaned money to the government.

Yet, what is money? Who issues the money? Who controls the money? Ultimately, is not the answer to the last two questions, The American People? And as for the first, money is the value of energy expended -- by (again) the American People. This is supposed to be a government of, by, and for the American people. Instead it has become a nation of and for the big lenders. This, above all, is what must change.

An economy based on full employment at fair wages will produce plenty of taxes collected to pay for any debts incurred.

For a fuller discussion see the article at the attached link, below. While one may argue about the propriety of "Quantitative Easing," the article explains pretty well the concept of money and finances in a democracy.


Coming Soon: More on how financial corporations can be brought under control


http://www.truth-out.org/forget-compromise-debt-ceiling-unconstitutional/1312205856

Dennis Kucinich "Downgrades" Standard & Poor's

This is from the web site of Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio. Mr. Kucinich has the right idea here. Whoever heard of some financial institution attempting to pass judgment on the "rating" of the United States?

Washington, Apr 19 -

Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) today released the following statement after Standard & Poor’s (S&P) threatened the fiscal health of the nation by announcing the possibility of a future downgrade of the United States’ credit rating.

“No nation, agency or organization has the authority to dictate terms to the United States Government,” said Kucinich. “S&P and its compatriot Moody’s were a direct cause of the near collapse of the economy of the United States. That industry should be subject to greater oversight, regulation and fundamental overhaul as Washington gets serious about the deficit.”

According to a recent report by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, S&P and Moody’s directly contributed to the near collapse of our economy by giving their highest ratings to bonds that they knew were secured by high risk mortgages, in order to earn profitable fees from Wall Street firms, and then abruptly downgrading those bonds, some of which were less than a year old.

“The United States should not be held hostage by Wall Street. We need to get serious about the deficit, which was created by President Bush’s decisions to conduct multiple wars while cutting taxes for the wealthy. We need to end the wars in Iraq, in Afghanistan and in Libya, which will lower our deficit. We need to end the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, which will lower our deficit. We need to create jobs, which will produce more tax revenues and lower our deficit. We need to reform our monetary policy which allows unaccountable banks and agencies to exercise inexcusable amounts of power over our economy," said Kucinich.

The Debt Ceiling Debate Hoax

Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor of the storied NATION magazine, was on "All Things Considered" this afternoon, speaking about the debt ceiling debate in Congress. Her smart commentary revealed how out of touch Congress is. She fears, she said, that Democrats are too much buying into the story line that Americans are worried most about the nation's debt.

She informed listeners that polls show the top suggestion Americans have revealed in polls for reducing the debt is raising taxes on millionaires and billionaires.

She further stated that there has been a terrific misreading of the 2010 election. That election, she declared, was not about the national debt, but about the economy and jobs. The result was a criticism of Democrats for not doing enough on that score. If Ms. vanden Heuvel is right, the Democrats are off on a horrible track for the 2012 election.

Debt Ceiling "Debate" Seen as a Ruse by Republicans

The author of this referenced article (see link below), asserts that the current brouhaha over the debt ceiling is little more than a ruse by certain forces, now represented by the Republican Party to attack and eventually kill Social Security. I agree.

We are dealing with some evil and sick people.

http://www.nationofchange.org/debt-madness-was-always-about-killing-social-security-1311780544

2010 Voter Turn-out Offers a Surprise to Many

Dr. Michael McDonald of the Department of Public and International Affairs, George Mason University, has compiled some useful statistics from last autumn's election. The data show that turn-out amongst the entire voting-age population was just under 38%. This is a meager rate, to say the least. Thus, all these claims by pundits that "America" voted for this or "America" voted for that are pure hogwash. Clearly, some 62% of the voting-age population didn't vote at all. So, no conclusions whatever about the overall population can be drawn from the vote. It is clear a majority of those who voted were unhappy with the status quo. But even here results were more mixed than advertised, with several Democrats winning key Senate races.

Of course, there was a message of dissatisfaction which millions of Americans felt. But this can be attributed to dissatisfaction with the economy more than any high enthusiasm for right-wing Republicanism. After many months of melodrama brought to us by the Boehner-Cantor-Bachmann show, this has become obvious.

Poster at Daily Kos Tells the True Story

A gentleman called only "Steven D." has written a post at Daily Kos which is useful in keeping alive the idea that Social Security is as much of a social contract as it is an "entitlement." Social Security was not intended to be merely something people were entitled to, but something workers would earn through their work during their life-times.

Republicans were against Social Security in the 1930s and they are against it now -- at least many are. Unable to destroy the program out-right, they seek to dismantle it step by ugly step, using a contrived debt ceiling battle as the starting point.

I am quoting from this blog post at length, but the entire post deserves to be read. There is good history here. There are a few spelling, style, and syntax errors here, but I believe they are not so serious as to compromise the truth of the message.

***********

Mon Jul 25, 2011 at 07:04 AM PDT
Update: “Social Security is not an entitlement; it is a promise ..." Youngstown, Ohio Townhall

by Steven D

UPDATE: To everyone saying it is an entitlement, this update's for you. First, I agree, it Social Security, et alia, are entitlements. I chose the title of this diary because it was a quote from the article, but also because I liked the use of the word "promise," which makes clear the obligation owed by the government and our elected officials to all of us, and not just our "right" to receive some benefit. Let me explain.

The term "entitlement" has gotten a bad connotation due to Republicans demonizing the word, but I agree we should push back and reclaim it. However, the social safety net is also a compact or covenant by the federal government with Americans. The government takes out taxes for the programs from our paychecks or income (for all you private business owners and "contractors") and to justify the taxation the government "promised" to pay retirement and health benefits when we needed them. The programs have been among the most successful and cost efficient ever administered by the Federal Government (especially when you compare it to the other sacred cow of the budget, our Defense Department., where waste and corruption are rampant and the primary beneficiaries are defense contractors. National Defense is also a "promise" made by the government to Americans, one that sadly it has failed at on numerous occasions (911 being just one of many failures). Yet no one ever argues over the effectiveness or efficiency our Military Industrial Complex, much less the burden it imposes on taxpayers and the national debt.

So, I agree with those who embrace the term "entitlement" but I also want to impress upon people the nature of the promise that was made to the American people by our Government, a promise up to now that they have for the most part kept. That our elected officials our even discussing reducing entitlements, i.e., breaking that longstanding promise and/or covenant with the American people who have held up their end of the bargain, much less actually suggesting reforms that would harm the most vulnerable in our society so billionaires, millionaires and corporations can continue to pay the lowest income taxes since the 1920's is beyond outrageous.

* * *

Last night in Youngstown, Ohio, 200 or so people, seniors and activists and politicians, met at a town-hall event at United Baptist Church. Senator Sherrod Brown appeared and spoke at the event that was sponsored by the Mahoning Valley Organizing Collaborative, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the Ohio Organizing Collaborative. The message from the people of Youngstown who attended was clear. Here's the takeaway quote from Carolyn Williams of Youngstown:

“Social Security is not an entitlement; it is a promise to the American people who have paid into the system,” Williams told [the audience]. [...]

“Proposed cuts will force recipients to pay higher insurance premiums and co-pays, and deny us money for essentials like prescription drugs and groceries.”

Williams has reason to be angry with all the talk in Washington about cutting Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security. She had to take an early retirement as an X-Ray Technician who worked hard for 24 years because of an injury. She depends on benefits to survive. But she wasn't the only person last night to tell her personal story and express her anger at official Washington's out of touch attitude toward the suffering of working people who rely on our social safety net. They paid for these benefits with their taxes and now they don't want the wealthy and the corporations to avoid paying there share of the deficits brought about by the Bush tax cuts, the needless and illegal wars he fought and the borrowing by the Treasury to fund those deficits (which Republicans approved each time it came up during President Bush's two terms). They haven't forgotten what former Vice President Dick Cheney said about deficits to then Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill when the GOP was in control of our government:

O'Neill, fired in a shakeup of Bush's economic team in December 2002, raised objections to a new round of tax cuts and said the president balked at his more aggressive plan to combat corporate crime after a string of accounting scandals because of opposition from "the corporate crowd," a key constituency.

O'Neill said he tried to warn Vice President Dick Cheney that growing budget deficits-expected to top $500 billion this fiscal year alone-posed a threat to the economy. Cheney cut him off. "You know, Paul, Reagan proved deficits don't matter," he said, according to excerpts. Cheney continued: "We won the midterms (congressional elections). This is our due." A month later, Cheney told the Treasury secretary he was fired.

This is our due. Well, those tax cuts that primarily benefited the wealthiest among us and major corporations, the massive and wasteful spending increases for Defense led led to the surge in deficits after Bill Clinton handed Bush a budget surplus. Furthermore, the lack of federal regulation of financial institutions and the lax policy of the Fed regarding the bubble in real estate that blew the economy to kingdom come under Bush in 2007-2008 and the huge sums of cash handed out to bailout said financial institutions was all generated by the excessive spending and borrowing of Republicans.

Now Republicans, whose corporate and wealthy "friends" made out like bandits (literally) during the Bush years, are all about "sacrifice" but the only people they want to bleed are the poor and middle class....

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/07/25/998421/-Update:-%E2%80%9CSocial-Security-is-not-an-entitlement;-it-is-a-promise--Youngstown,-OH-Townhall?via=spotlight