Charlie Rose

NeilMacCallister  11/20/2012 01:41 AM Report

tabs??? ..what are you so worried about???

First, ..it is a mistake to believe that Nancy Pelosi OR Barack Obama have "authority" .."To Govern".

No, really, ..that is NOT their job!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"We the People" ..are to govern.

Nancy, ..and Barack, ..and Boehner, ..and Biden...

As Clint pointed out, ..They all just work for US!!!!

If you don't like your country, ..just look out to your neighbor on the left, ..and your neighbor on the right, ..and call out your window loudly "Which one of you people ordered this double-pattie of perpetual POVERTY?????"

***

Secondly, ..what is so wrong about the "fiscal cliff"????

Here in California, ..we have these electric BART commuter trains, which have these 12' tall mountains of sand at the end of each rail line. If the "brains" behind the trains do not stop the engine cars as they are paid to, ..that sand mountain will.

It is the same for the thieves we send to Washington. If they do NOT do the jobs for which they are hired (..and WELL PAID!!!) then we have this budget "crash-barrier" in place to make sure this brain-dead legislature does not kill TOO many people while they vacation in Washington.

***

Yes, it will be horrendous and ugly, ..but then I have to paint this house for $10-bucks-an-hour on that day, ..and I thought we already PAID some "Americans" to go resolve our budget necessities???

I think Obama is playing golf that day.

***

It looks like a "fiscal cliff" is what we get for trusting the government of our country to someone else!!!

Oh well.

tabs  11/19/2012 01:54 PM Report

To Govern

President Barrack Obama is going to have to head straight for the Center of the political spectrum if the nation is to avert a "fiscal cliff" and more importantly the "fiscal abyss." Logic and reason dictate that President Obama going forward is going to be forced to make a common cause coalition with the more Centrist Republicans and gather those Democrats who will follow to the Center. Failing that a continuation of the partisan divide will show just how foolishly short sighted the political leadership of the United States is, which will lead to the fiscal and monetary failure of the nation.

Over this past weekend House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi once again trumpeted the partisan divide by once again throwing salt in the wounds of her Republican colleagues by stating that "There will be no deal unless the TAX RATES of those who make over $250,000 USD are raised." This sends a mixed message from the Democrats and makes one wonder who should one believe is running the show, President Obama who states he is seeking "compromise" or Nancy Pelosi who remains entrenched in her ideological beliefs, which promotes the partisan divide? At the very least Nancy Pelosi in making those statements not only undermines President Obama's authority, but makes President Obamas leadershiip appear to be weak and ineffectual because there is only one President of the United States and one head of the Democrat party, not two. . Thus President Obama is going to have to bring his own house to order in order to govern this nation effectivily.

__________________

tabs  11/18/2012 01:40 PM Report

As Marlene Dietrich told Orson Wells in the movie "A Touch Of Evil," "Susan Rice your future is all used up." For one round of Sunday political talk shows MS Rice used up all her credibility and thus future. Obama for the sake of political positioning used her up. For Obama she is going to be an embarrassing reminder to have around and the sooner she disappears the better it is for him.

tabs  11/17/2012 04:56 PM Report

Susan Rice for Secretary of State???? To put it bluntly Susan Rice has a very low TRUST coefficient which means she has NO CREDIBILITY. The very fact that her words about the Benghazi massacre proved to be MISTAKEN either shows she is a foolish dupe of the Obama administration or she purposely told untruths. In appearance her nomination for Secretary of State seems to be a payment for services rendered. This is a bad start for an administration that already has credibility problems. Does President Obama need more problems?

NeilMacCallister  11/17/2012 03:30 AM Report

"Susan Rice, .."Susan Rice, .."Susan Rice.." ..do I have the name correct?

...For Secreatary of State????

Wait a minute!!! ..What happened to Hillary Clinton????

Did she FINALLY decide to "Stop Believing"???

***

My daughter wanted Hillary in '08, ..and Mitt in 2012.

She said "We shouldn't be a people who steal our money."

***

Oh well.

output-based-money  11/16/2012 10:52 PM Report

My new site is called www.newnsa.us It emphasizes the need for gargantuan computer support for logistical information and use -- in order to manage the economy and recover from the past. If we do not do something on the order of my proposed agenda, grief will be our reward. I do not expect the decline and fall of American democracy. But it is possible. We should all become members of a policy wiki to organize for permanent peace and prosperity. Anything less is not necessary. Anything better is welcome.

tabs  11/16/2012 10:00 AM Report

NCP3:

"This spending will not be forthcoming withOUT his LEADERSHIP and Republican COOPERATION" OBM

Effective "Leadership" requires that one can finesse "Cooperation." One certainly does not get "Cooperation" when one continually throws salt into the wounds that divide. This is a sign of poor leadership skills because it is a sure prescription for a failure in achieving the remedy which the nation desperately needs.

The very degree of the amount of need in achieving a remedy should dictate the amount of flexibility in ones stated position. That is true leadership and not this drawing of lines in the sand which only facilitates inflexibilty.

Excuse one for the tirade, but the most important national leader in the world does not understand this as evidenced by his own rhetoric? Didn't someone ever tell him that one can catch more flies with honey than with salt? Exactly what does one think the results of this kind of leadership will be?

tabs  11/16/2012 08:56 AM Report

NCP2:

One has refrained from stating what Mitt Romney's Achilles Heel is before the election,for obvious reasons. Mitt Romney himself stated it during his Convention speech, that "He does what is expected of him." Which means that Mitt Romney is ultimately a CONFORMIST and does not think independently. Mitt Romney does not take chances nor stand up to even mild criticism from which he shrinks and even changes what he says he believes. This is the root cause of Romney appearing to be inauthentic in that he can not expose his real self lest he be chastised. So one spends time being picture perfect or in other words being Robotic. One hopes that Mitt goes off into that politicial sunset gracefully.

output-based-money  11/16/2012 08:45 AM Report

ADDING RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTAINING SUPPLY CHAIN DATABASES TO THE ROLE OF THE NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY (NSA) TO MEET WHAT THE DOD AND ITS MILITARY STAFFS SAY ARE OUR GREATEST THREATS

[to replace the heading below]

output-based-money  11/16/2012 08:35 AM Report

WE MUST ADD TO RESPONSIBILITY OF THE NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY (NSA) DEFENSE AGAINST INDUSTRIAL FAILURE -- THAT

OUR DEFENSE DEPARTMENT AND ITS MILITARY EXPERTS HAVE

IDENTIFIED AS OUR GREATEST THREATS TO PEACE AND DEOCRACY

NSA operates one of the most advanced and powerful computer systems on earth to protect us from threats to the survival of our nation and its people.

Military intelligence is its primary product.

The economic threat to our survival -- including survival of freedom, freedom from want and freedom from fear, and survival of our existential human rights, -- is the threat we must meet and defeat ASAP.

Economic intelligence is the primary product I refer to.

My number one objective is to empower our central bank and whole economy to spend the money (backed by production of essential output) that we must create, if democracy is to survive.

Such output-based money will join with other types of money -- that may be backed by related debt.

In responding to its responsibility, a new NSA must recognize that money is defined by both the law of legal tender and the markets where it's spent.

It is my expectation that our responsibility to produce both "all our needs" and "all the money it takes to buy our output and what we receive in trade", must result in a harmonious partnership between lawmakers and the agency.

The aforementioned freedoms must not be allowed to be taken from the people by firms or individuals through larceny and corruption.

It has been observed that nature's God has made many people -- and far too many of them are poor.

But the people have created automation and robotics. These blessings must be put to use to supply our needs and to furnish the information to allow our money supply to buy our products and services for sale.

Every person's spending is another person's income. So those who ignore the need to spend make production impossible.

No system of money or accounting should be accepted by lawmakers or the NSA as a suicide pact between the peoples of planet earth and their ancestors.

We should not accept that debt is more deserving of protection than the people's money. Debt must be subordinate to the future of lawful money. That's why bankruptcy is protected by the constitution -- and national suicide is not its goal.

output-based-money  11/16/2012 08:11 AM Report

Neil MacCallister and REMant make me ill. They remain unconvinced that high tech mass production can be employed to solve the current crises that will only yield to raising the supply of wants and the supply of money to buy what we produce.

My latest mess on the web, at www.why-now.us talks of the NSA. We need to add to its mission, economic security of America and the global economy.

output-based-money  11/16/2012 07:59 AM Report

Correction:

This spending will not be forthcoming withOUT his LEADERSHIP and Republican COOPERATION.

tabs  11/16/2012 07:56 AM Report

On Friday last President Barrack Obama held a Press Event in which he assertively stated that he was ready for compromise, going on to say that it had to be a "Balanced Approach." Then bringing up taxing the Wealthiest 2% of Americans,finally concluding with pulling the pen out of his pocket while saying that he was ready to sign a Bill.

The question becomes why would one want to throw gasoline on a fire by aggravating the very people one HAS to compromise with by bringing up the symbol of the divisive partisan divide? The answer is that President Obama doesn't have the Emotional Maturity of a Lincoln who NEVER would ALIENATE those who he HAD TO NEGOTIATE WITH even before the negotiations have begun. This is in essence stacking the deck for failure of those negotiations.

output-based-money  11/16/2012 07:56 AM Report

This press conference allowed the president to inform all Americans (whose votes were nearly half against his second term -- and slightly more than that in favor of keeping him in his job,) of what he wants to do before our new congress takes over from the one in office at this moment.

So he did: he wants to make deal to tax the two percent of us, who make more than enough to get by, a few percent more of our taxable income than they now pay.

The extra tax to be sought would show the world America is not anxious to tempt the global economy to fear that he and we are hoping for high inflation sooner rather later.

The Republicans, and others who do and did not support his re-election, agree with the president's wish to protect us from inflation. But they claim we need jobs and growth more than the higher tax rates he so badly wants. The issue is nonsense. He is more wrong than they are.

We need extremely aggressive spending to solve acute problems in infrastructure, education and re-training, job creation in manufacturing and all other sectors, health care delivery (meaning more doctors, nurses, clinics and hospitals, etc.), green energy, and defense against enemies -- human and others like natural disasters). This spending will not be forthcoming with his LEADERSHIP and Republican COOPERATION.

So we are treated in this conference with a vision of uncooperative lawmakers and a wrong-headed president in office. We needed a new version of Teddy Roosevelt. We got a loser without a vision. His nation needs to spend many times more than he's asking for -- and he will not make the case that Krugman makes. And he will not ease off his fear of inflation and latch on to our desperate need of jobs and programs that will grow our output to protect the dollar.

The REMant voice, as always, denies the power of the Fed Chairman to lead us to where we can find all the money we need to recover -- and lead the world to a prosperous future. His voice and the presidents set my teeth on edge. Both are infected by denial of the current opportunity of this great nation to overcome scarcity and produce our way to victory over want. They are prisoners of a past where high technology was not yet ready to assist a willing nation to employ every person and solve every real problem standing in our way.

On Charlie Rose the other day Tom Friedman warned the forces of mother nature and free market habits were real -- and they had to be met with intellectual skill and a political will of iron. David Brooks agreed but saw three needs, the will to reorganize debt, the the skill to end political gridlock, and the vision to educate the nation for economic success, as needs beyond the indicated talent of this president to recognize and approach with determined rational thought.

Charlie Rose has the best TV in America -- and in the words of John Nance Garner, FDR's first vice president, -- his show ain't worth a barrel of warm spit -- when it comes to seeing our needs and doing his job of hosting a talk show for some good reason.

Max83  11/16/2012 04:57 AM Report

Many Republicans are saying the USA is on its way to becoming Greece.

This very good recent article from ''Der Spiegel'', which proves in my opinion that one of the main reasons Greece is in the state it is today, is because the Greek 1 Percent or 1/10 of the One Percent is not doing their fair share and are actively dodging to be taxed fairly.

'Horrible Citizens' The Life of Greece's One Percent

By Julia Amalia Heyer

Article link in English: http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/the-crisis-has-yet-to-hit-the-wealthiest-greeks-a-866693.h tml

''The Greek economy has been tanking for years now as the country struggles to balance its budget by imposing deep austerity measures. But the country's richest residents haven't noticed. Many aren't taxed at all, and some of those that are prefer to dodge their obligation to the state instead.''

and more form the article:

'' Stored away in Switzerland

At the same time, there are a number of lists circulating in Athens including names attached to unfathomable sums of money. These belong to politicians, actors and businesspeople, all of whom supposedly have accounts at the Geneva branch of the British bank HSBC. Experts estimate that Greeks have up to €170 billion in assets safely stored away in Switzerland.

"Greece is a poor country with very rich people," Finance Minister Yannis Stournaras recently said. And philanthropy, though a Greek word, is not widespread in practice. Members of the country's upper crust continue to exploit all the loopholes the government offers them. Indeed, the state makes it remarkably easy for them to do so: For a full year now, the government has been announcing that a treaty with Switzerland aiming to put an end to tax evasion is "just about to be concluded." But it has yet to be signed.''

NeilMacCallister  11/16/2012 02:47 AM Report

I'm impoverished, Dasein, ..and I got no help from Barack's socialism, ..did you????

In his first term, the man overspent his budget by $6 TRILLION dollars!!!

Where did all that money go, Dasein???? ..my house is still underwater! ..and actually, there are now a lot MORE houses UNDERWATER!!!

Where did that $6 Trillion go, Dasein???

Barack Obama's deficits are 4 TIMES LARGER than the biggest deficit that George Bush ever had! ..even while George funded 2 fighting wars!!

Where are all those Trillions of dollars going?? ..Dasein???

If I ain't getting it? ..and YOU ain't getting it? ..Who is getting all those Trillions of dollars????

**

Or as that guy holding the cardboard sign down at the freeway off-ramp says, "This socialism really sucks!"

Dasein  11/15/2012 08:52 PM Report

"From each according to his ability" (the rich)"to each according to his need" (the impoverished) says the chief executive who is rich but represents the impoverished. Or as Wm Morris said.."Socialism-the most helpful and happy life for all!"

MisterMittster  11/15/2012 07:29 PM Report

Press Conference?!

I don't need no stinkin 'Press Conference'.

REMant  11/15/2012 01:06 PM Report

Not just the president's first press conference since being re-elected, it's the first anyone can hardly remember, the last being three months ago on August 20. And if you don't count appearances with foreign dignitaries and summits, only the third this year in the White House, the only other being on March 6. Given the general vacuity of the press corps I can't say I blame him, but it goes with the territory, and omitting them certainly doesn't make anyone any smarter.

As I said yesterday, the point of the Petraeus "scandal" is not that these women were enemy agents or any threat to security, indeed they were supposed allies in the global war for democracy, but that their involvement threatened the women's vote. An affair with the head of Planned Parenthood would have borne the same recriminations.

No one is suggesting tax progressivity be removed - ANY income tax will be progressive in absolute terms - altho there are some who'd rather have a sales tax. The problem is the GOP wants spending cuts in return for tax increases, probably in something like a 3-to-1 ratio. The president is willing to cut the deficit, not the spending. He said he wants to put "people back to work rebuilding our roads, our bridges, and our schools." Nothing was said about any other work. We presumably do not need food, and a lot of the rest can be bought from China and Saudi Arabia. Cutting spending would risk the dependency vote. He's meeting with CEOs only because they loudly suggested otherwise. So if he also says he wants a "comprehensive deal" who believes him? Or that any deal would be "comprehensive" enough?

And why should the wealthiest Americans be treated as even more of a minority than they already are? They aren't the recipients of affirmative action...except, that is, from the Fed, supported by this president, which caused all the problems in the first place and continues the same policies, increasing the price of goods and esp services and diminishing their availability, with the effect, for instance, that fewer can afford health care. The admin says it wants to get a trillion dollars more from those making more than $250,000 annually, which will be just enough to cover the $1 trillion being spent annually on welfare. We've spent nearly $8 trillion on wars and defense since 2001.

The reason for not nominating Susan Rice is simply that she's a zealot, which we don't need anymore of. But so are Graham and McCain, so their objection isn't on that basis; it's only noise, like Karl Rove's, all the more aggravated I'd imagine because McCain was so sure those Libyans were perfect little angels. But now they are all plumping for the same outcome in Syria. As I've said before, McCain is still fighting the Vietnam War.