The Pennsylvania Progressive

Debate: Iraq

Wow, it didn't take long for Clinton to brag about one of her endorsements:  Maxine waters.  I'll say one thing for her, she doesn't waste time flip flopping.

Obama made a great point saying he wants to change the entire mind set which got us into Iraq.  As Blitzer pointed out this was a clear jab at Shrillary.  Barack also said we shouldn't have invaded if we were concerned about Iran.  He challenged the Republicans who support (except for Paul) a continuation of the failed Bush policy.

The next question is about judgment.  It is directed at Clinton and concerns the Levin Amendment.  She again is defending her vote for AUMF saying (fictionally) that her vote was about sending the weapons inspectors back into Iraq.  The fallacy of her argument is that Bush had compromised the inspectors by using them for intelligence purposes in violation of their mission.  Saddam wouldn't allow them back into Iraq because of Bush's treachery.

Obama scores by saying Democrats are better off with a nominee who can claim they called it correctly from the start.  Thisis the second biggest argument against supporting Hillary.  Her ability to galvanize Republicans to support one of their awful candidates is the biggest.

Wold asks Clinton why she is unable to say her AUMF vote was a mistake.  OK, she still won't.  Haven't we had enough of leaders who are unable to admit when they make a mistake?  Boo.

She says no one could guess how onsessed this president was about using force.  What cave was she hiding in?  932 lies about weapons of mass destruction, mushroom clouds over American cities, bogus uranium in Africa lies, how dense is Clinton???

She gets away from the question (who has better judgment) by saying this is about what we do going forward and she's clueless about the judgment question.  Wolf confronts her and the crowd boos but it's legitimate.  She completely blew this question because she forgot what the question was about.  Big failure here.

Wouldn't things go better if she simply admitted she screwed up than beat this dead horse repeatedly?   Clinton loses the Iraq issue and she loses it badly.

Obama slams her use of the Day one argument here by claiming, justifiably, that it's more important to be right on day one than ready.  This goes straight to the question:  good judgment.

Debate Part III

Both scored points in comparing themselves to Mitt Romney.  Obama's point that Mitt hasn't gotten a good return on his investment scored big.

The Kennedy endorsements are next.  Clinton's substandard Camelot endorsements pale in comparison to Teddy and Caroline.  She's taking the tack of trying to minimize endorsements.  Let's watch her stick with this when it comes to her Party insider endorsements.  Want to bet she flip flops when it comes to trumpeting some Governor's backing?

Wolf asks Barack if Americans should recall the Clinton years fondly?  He credits those eight years in comparison with George Bush but also mentions the energizing effect his campaign is having on the people.  He'll probably mention again that we should look to the future and not the past.  Has everyone forgotten all that darned baggage that came with the Clintons?

Clinton scored points saying it took a Clinton to clean up after the first President Bush and it'll take another to clean up after this Bush.  Not necessarily but it was a good line.

Have you noticed the complete lack of questions in all of these coal industry sponsored debates about climate change?  Coincidence?  Or does this say something about CNN's ethics?

Debate: Immigration

Both candidates are making important points about immigration.  I liked how Obama confronted the employers exploiting these people and smacking down all the demagogues and bigots (Lou Dobbs anyone?) exploiting the issue to divide the country on racial lines.

Clinton also debunked the arguments which are all over networks like CNN.  I thought I was watching Faux news tonight when Kitty Pilgrim came on for Dobbs and condemned Harry Reid and Democrats for "putting their agenda ahead of the country's" on the economic stimulus plan.  Shame on CNN.  It's time thisnetwork balanced their coverage with some liberal talking heads.

The issue of drivers licenses is up again.  This is the issue Sen. Clinton flip flopped on several times during the debate in Philadelphia.  I have no problem with everyone learning to drive, learning the rules, and having insurance.  Americans are bad enough drivers and having 12 million unlicensed, uninsured drivers on the road scares the willies out of me.

Shrillary is now trying to weasel out of her disgraceful political posturing on this in that earlier debate.  Obama takes the point here.

Debate Coverage

The first Democratic debate pitting Obama versus Clinton one on one is under way.  It didn't take long for Shrillary to make her "day one" message.  I love Barack's comeback:  it's more important o be right on day one.  That underscores her bad decisions on Iraq, Iran, the bankruptcy bill, etc.  The first big policy debate is health care.  On this issue Clinton has the upper hand.  I don't understand why Obama clings to his bad plan.

How many times will Shrillary make her bogus claim about "35 years of public service?"  Why does she include the 17 years she worked at The Rose Law Firm where she defended corporate clients like Wal-Mart and Tyson Foods?  Does she count that as "public service?"  What that says about her isn't attractive.

The next question is about Democrats being labeled "tax and spend liberals."  The best defense for this, of course, is that Republicans are "borrow and spend extremists."  It is always better to live within your means and avoid the massive debt Republicans have been responsible for the past 28 years.  It is about fiscal responsibility and Republicans use this scurrilous term to hide their own own financial and budgetary mismanagement.

The Real McCain

Obama's January Haul: $32 million

Brack Obama's campaign is set to report a record windfall of monetary support for January:  $32 million.  That's just one month!  The figure is more than any previous three month FEC reporting period for the Illinois Senator.  Putting it in perspective this is more than one million dollars per day.  It also reflected 170,000 new individual contributors. 

House Adjourns Without Tax Reform

The Pennsylvania House adjourned for the week without passing property tax reform.  Three days of debate only accomplished a whittling down of proposals.  The Commonwealth Caucus offspring died overwhelmingly and then John Perzel threw a high hard one at Democrats:  a proposal to exempt only senior citizens.  A traditional Democratic demographic hit hardest by real estate property taxes, concentrating relief to seniors would make Republicans look good and Dems bad coming into a critical election year.

Perzel's idea uses the cash hauled in from slot machines and target that money exclusively for elder Pennsylvanians.  Those over age 65 with incomes under $40,000 would have their school (these proposals only deal with school taxes, not county taxes) real estate taxes eliminated. 

The debate on HB 1600 now comes down to either reducing taxes for everyone or eliminating the tax for those over 65.    This is a tough call for Democrats.  Many of those calling for reform aren't seniors and they are very vocal.  Passing Perzel's bill would be a complete reversal of the promises made by the legislature when it passed slots legislation.  They promised assistance to all property owners in exchange for the casinos.

Property tax reform is the single biggest issue in Pennsylvania.  Many voters will support or oppose incumbents based on these votes and/or the success or lack of reform.  What I find interesting are the seniors who own large, expensive homes but claim they cannot pay their taxes.  I suppose they are the same people who bought new cars every three years and went on expensive vacations rather than invest their funds for retirement.  I've even watched some of them attend community and government meetings wearing expensive fur coats.

Many seniors opt to trade down to smaller, more affordable homes when they retire.  I saw this in my own family.  As one's income shrinks with retirement most people choose to live within their new means.  Others do not.  The counter argument to this is that once one pays for their home the government shouldn't have the right to take it for non payment of taxes.  I can't say I disagree with that.

However we all have an obligation to support our communities.  Each of us uses roads, bridges, schools, police, fire, and emergency services.  We all should contribute and we all should invest in our communities.  We all benefit from public education.  We either went to school, work with people who did, are supported in our senior years by those working and paying into Social Security and Medicare, and by those toiling in commerce and industry who attended public school.  We all have a stake in the success of public education and, conversely, should support this.

The question is how.  Business and industry have a genuine vested interest in public education.  An educated worker is a productive one.  America has the most productive workforce in the world in spite of the constant criticism of public education.  We do turn out a labor force capable of doing the job.  Business and industry should contribute to education and they do via property taxes.  I don't think that should change.

Those wealthy enough to afford second homes, be they vacation or investment are clearly better off financially.  Investment properties should continue to be taxed.  Contrary to many ignorant letter writers I see in newspapers, renters do pay property taxes:  they are factored into their monthly rents.  When taxes go up their rents go up proportionately.  I've never known a landlord who didn't pass along their real estate tax expenses to their renters.  This is why the state tax rebate program run with lottery proceeds includes renters.

How will House Democrats deal with Perzel's proposal?  The Post Gazette calls it a curveball.  Do they go along and give Republicans something to crow about with senior citizens?  They cannot afford to alienate these voters and they also must be careful about angering everyone who gets screwed after being promised lower taxes.  Stay tuned for this one.

Republican Revisionism

The Republican debate last night was definitely argumentative.  I was waiting for John McCain and Mitt Romney to clench one another's throat and choke away.  The intense dislike between these two is apparent.  The argument had to do with McCain's assertion in Florida that Romney called for timetables for withdrawal from Iraq.  McCain has been steadfastly supporting a permanent American presence in Iraq for at least the next 100 years.

Reality check for McCain:  70% of Americans are dead set against that policy. 

Romney claims he never called for a publicly announced date for withdrawal but for a secret agreement with the Iraqi leadership for progress on political issues.  No peace will ever come to Iraq until the Shias, Sunnis and Kurds agree to share power, resources and wealth.  No progress has yet been made because the Bush Administration refuses to mandate goals and benchmarks for completion of these issues.

Republicans have blocked every Democratic effort to impose such basic management methods.  I love the GOP revisionism on Iraq:  now it's the Democrats fault that we lost this war.  Calling it "Hillary's surrender" is lying.  George W. Bush and his fellow Republicans lost this war, not Clinton.  Hillary, in fact, supported Bush and was one of his enablers in Congress.

Democrats didn't lose Iraq, Republicans lost this war.  Trying to transfer the blame for their massive policy failures is cowardice.  Democrats didn't disband the Iraqi Army.  Democrats didn't declare Baathists could no be employed.  Democrats didn't create phony intelligence and lie to America to build phony support for the war.  Democrats didn't fail to deploy enough troops to keep the peace.  Democrats didn't fail to have a plan for civil administration of Iraq during an occupation.  Democrats didn't lie about how many Iraqis were being trained.  Democrats didn't blindly equip the insurgents with our own arms.  It wasn't Democrats who failed to have enough troops to guard large arms caches and depots during the invasion.

These were all Republican failures, mismanaged by the White House and supported by a GOP Congress and Cabinet.  Now the Republican presidential candidates are trying to paint the blame for their massive failures on the Democrats.  It is The Big Lie of 2008.

News & Notes

News has been coming fast and furious this week.  I'll lump some together here for the sake of brevity.

Louis DeNaples was indicted for perjury.  The licensee of the Mount Airy Resort and Casino has been accused of lying about his connections to the mob.  None of this seemed to dismay the state gambling commission however.  I was shocked when they awarded him a slots license and now they have lost any credibility.

Rudy Giuliani, as expected, dropped out and endorsed John McCain.  Rudy will be remembered for the worst ever strategy by a front runner.

There's a lot of debate about where John Edwards' supporters will go.  If you were an Edwards person who are you supporting now, Obama or Clinton?

The Republican presidential candidates keep claiming America has the best health care system in the world.  Wrong.  We're actually ranked quite low and beneath every western civilized country with a single payer, universal system.  What's more we pay double per capita for our substandard care.  It's nothing to brag about and it's time they began using facts instead of fiction if anyone is to take anything they say seriously.

Michael Mukasey refused to say much about water boarding yesterday other than we aren't doing it anymore.  How afraid is this Administration of war crimes and impeachment for their misconduct?  Plenty.  So far there's little difference between Mukasey and Gonzales on these issues.  Neither one is willing to testify truthfully and completely to Congress.

Cyril Wecht ought to be embarrassed by the testimony to his monstrous ego at his trial.  The truth is though many public servants use their staff for improper work.  Mary Beth Buchanan, the US Attorney prosecuting Wecht had her staff write her speeches given to the Federalist Society and Congressman Tim Murphy had his government staff perform campaign work in 2006.  When are they being arrested?

Peace With Honor

I'm listening to the Republican Presidential candidates talking about Iraq in terms of "peace with honor."  I shudder hearing those historical words because they remind me of Richard M. Nixon.  How do you have any honor when you conducted an illegal war, tortured prisoners and killed a million Iraqi civilians?