Update from the AP on today’s ongoing outcry for “ousting” the Bad Boy Governor of Illinois.
CHICAGO – Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich kissed his wife, rode in his state SUV to the office and sat down at his desk Thursday in front of a bust of Lincoln and an American flag to portray “a return to normalcy.” It was anything but. An extraordinary drama built through the day in Chicago as the political establishment of Illinois and the nation lined up against him.
Blagojevich’s approval rating dropped to an all-time low of 8 percent, and friends and foes alike feared if they don’t act swiftly to get rid of him, he might commit some kind of political mischief.
“The governor is in office, and he needs to be removed from office,” Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn said. “It is an urgent matter. Illinois is in crisis.”
The governor showed no signs of buckling to growing demands that he quit or be removed after his arrest Tuesday on corruption charges alleging that he tried to sell President-elect Barack Obama‘s Senate seat to the highest bidder.
While the governor was working — his spokesman would not say on exactly what — President-elect Obama told a news conference just a couple of blocks away that Blagojevich should go.
At the same time, Illinois lawmakers were organizing impeachment efforts, and the state attorney general said that if the governor were not impeached, she would seek a court order finding him unfit to serve.
Obama, speaking directly for the first time on the scandal that has distracted from his otherwise smooth transition, said he was “appalled” by the allegations.
“What I’m absolutely certain about is that our office had no involvement in any dealmaking around my Senate seat. That I’m absolutely certain of,” he said. “That would be a violation of everything that this campaign has been about. And that’s not how we do business.”
The governor spent the day at his wooden desk, reviewing budget issues and talking to his closest aides.
Blagojevich spokesman Lucio Guerrero described the governor’s mood as “upbeat” and “positive” and said “there’s a sense of trying to return to normalcy.” He said he knew of no decision about Blagojevich’s political future or what the governor might do with the Obama seat.
Blagojevich’s next move was the subject of great speculation in Illinois and around the country. Some observers wondered whether he might be seeking a deal with prosecutors to use the governor’s office as a bargaining chip, possibly agreeing to step down in exchange for leniency.
But there was also worry that the governor might still pick a senator.
His refusal to step down has struck some as odd given the fact that wiretaps portrayed him as bored with his job, saying he was “struggling financially” and did “not want to be governor for the next two years.”
But staying in office provides a financial benefit amid the turmoil: He continues to draw a $177,000-a-year salary.
Also Thursday, the criminal complaint that outlined the charges against Blagojevich yielded new details. The Associated Press learned that Senate Candidate 4 in the complaint is Illinois Deputy Gov. Louanner Peters. The source was not authorized to speak publicly about the complaint and spoke on condition of anonymity.
In the complaint, Blagojevich said he would put the deputy governor in the Senate before he gives the seat to another candidate and “don’t get anything.”
The decision to launch impeachment proceedings largely rests with House Speaker Michael Madigan, who, according to several House Democrats, faces a strong desire among his members for quick action. They said voters are demanding it, and lawmakers are transmitting that message to Madigan.
A poll taken since Blagojevich’s arrest shows 73 percent of those surveyed support impeachment, and 70 percent think he should resign.
Chicago-based Glengariff Group surveyed 600 Illinois residents by phone Tuesday and Wednesday, and the results showed Blagojevich’s approval rating at 8 percent. The margin of error was plus or minus 4 percent.
Four House Democrats sent a letter to their colleagues Thursday seeking support for a motion to impeach Blagojevich. The letter asks members to indicate whether they oppose the idea or support it, or even whether they want to co-sponsor the motion.
Democratic Rep. Jack Franks, one of the governor’s fiercest critics, said he hopes Madigan will soon make clear that the House will launch impeachment proceedings unless Blagojevich resigns.
“It would be music to the ear of everyone in this state,” Franks said.
Franks said he has gotten “a deluge” of calls from lawmakers wanting to be part of any impeachment committee.
Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan, the daughter of the House speaker, threatened again Thursday to file a lawsuit asking the state Supreme Court to have Blagojevich declared unfit to hold office if he doesn’t resign soon or get impeached.
“Obviously right now, in the best of all possible worlds, the governor would do what’s right for the people of the state of Illinois. He would resign,” said Madigan, a longtime Blagojevich foe considering a run for governor in 2010.
But “at this point he appears to be staying put,” and Madigan wants a signal from lawmakers about whether they will move quickly on impeachment proceedings.
Legislative leaders planned a special session Monday to strip Blagojevich of his power to pick a new U.S. senator, putting the decision in the hands of Illinois voters instead.
The White House on Thursday said President George Bush finds Blagojevich’s alleged behavior “astounding.”
Quinn said the impeachment process should begin when the Legislature convenes. If lawmakers don’t take action, he would support Madigan going to the Supreme Court.
Quinn strongly criticized the possibility of a special election to fill Obama’s seat, saying it would take too long, leaving Illinois with just one senator in Washington for months. Quinn said he has not spoken to potential Senate appointees and doesn’t have a short list of candidates.
If he becomes governor, Quinn said his “first order of business” will be appointing a senator. He did not flatly rule out choosing a Republican, saying he would pick the most qualified candidate.
Associated Press Writers Adam Goldman in Chicago and Christopher Wills in Springfield, Ill., contributed to this report.
Over the last several days we have heard repeated comments about the PERSONAL SACRIFICES that PUBLIC SERVANTS endure while serving. While there are those who are away from their homes and families for extended times while in Washington or in their states capitols, it appears that the benefits far exceed the alleged personal sacrifices they make.
In fact, SIGN ME UP. Those who know me, know that I am great at making personal sacrifices and putting the interests of others before my own. That fact alone should qualify me for that political appointment that will be converted to a Senior Civil Servant position at the end of “the decider’s administration”. I will then, always, and forever have the most paid vacation days, the best health care benefits, the most paid federal or state holidays, per Diem’s, job security during an economic Armageddon, and the freedom to perform less than stellar job performance because I am forever secure in my Senior Civil Service position.
My future is bright, my financial security guaranteed. I can plan for the future, visualize my retirement and the second home that will be available through the “foreclosure” market. All of which was made possible while I was personally sacrificing as a political appointee and waiting to become a SENIOR CIVIL SERVANT.
I BEG YOU! Please allow me to make this personal sacrifice and become the much envied yet much maligned public servant. It would mean THE WORLD TO ME!
I bring this to your attention, because truth be known that many of these appointees, and civil servant employees would never make it in the private sector. Believe ME. THEY WOULD NOT. I have known many such “servants” and their less than stellar work ethic startles me. I have been honest with them and suggested that many of them and their associates would be fired during a probationary period for a variety of inadequacies if they were employed in the private sector. THEY LAUGH UPROARIOUSLY! (It might just be a defense mechanism)
My point in this while seemingly sarcastic, is a sad truth about some Public Servants. Not ALL, but a prevailing number of them.
For your disgust and reading pleasure is an article from thewashingtonpost.com:
By Juliet Eilperin and Carol D. Leonnig
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, November 18, 2008; A01
Just weeks before leaving office, the Interior Department’s top lawyer has shifted half a dozen key deputies — including two former political appointees who have been involved in controversial environmental decisions — into senior civil service posts.
The transfer of political appointees into permanent federal positions, called “burrowing” by career officials, creates security for those employees, and at least initially will deprive the incoming Obama administration of the chance to install its preferred appointees in some key jobs.
Similar efforts are taking place at other agencies. Two political hires at the Labor Department have already secured career posts there, and one at the Department of Housing and Urban Development is trying to make the switch.
Between March 1 and Nov. 3, according to the federal Office of Personnel Management, the Bush administration allowed 20 political appointees to become career civil servants. Six political appointees to the Senior Executive Service, the government’s most prestigious and highly paid employees, have received approval to take career jobs at the same level. Fourteen other political, or “Schedule C,” appointees have also been approved to take career jobs. One candidate was turned down by OPM and two were withdrawn by the submitting agency.
The personnel moves come as Bush administration officials are scrambling to cement in place policy and regulatory initiatives that touch on issues such as federal drinking-water standards, air quality at national parks, mountaintop mining and fisheries limits.
The practice of placing political appointees into permanent civil service posts before an administration ends is not new. In its last 12 months, the Clinton administration approved 47 such moves, including seven at the senior executive level. Federal employees with civil service status receive job protections that make it very difficult for managers to remove them.
Most of the personnel shifts have been done on a case-by-case basis, but Interior Solicitor David L. Bernhardt moved to place six deputies in senior agency positions with one stroke, including two who have repeatedly attracted controversy. Robert D. Comer, who was Rocky Mountain regional solicitor, was named to the civil service post of associate solicitor for mineral resources. Matthew McKeown, who served as deputy associate solicitor for mineral resources, will take Comer’s place in what is also a career post. Both had been converted from political appointees to civil service status.
In a report dated Oct. 13, 2004, Interior’s inspector general singled out Comer in criticizing a grazing agreement that the Bureau of Land Managementhad struck with a Wyoming rancher, saying Comer used “pressure and intimidation” to produce the settlement and pushed it through “with total disregard for the concerns raised by career field personnel.” McKeown — who as Idaho’s deputy attorney general had sued to overturn a Clinton administration rule barring road-building in certain national forests — has been criticized by environmentalists for promoting the cause of private property owners over the public interest on issues such as grazing and logging.
One career Interior official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity so as not to jeopardize his position, said McKeown will “have a huge impact on a broad swath of the West” in his new position, advising the Bureau of Land Management and the Fish and Wildlife Service on “all the programs they implement.” Comer, the official added, will help shape mining policy in his new assignment.
“It is an attempt by the outgoing administration to limit as much as possible [the incoming administration’s] ability to put its policy imprint on the Department of Interior,” the official said.
In a Nov. 13 memo obtained by The Washington Post, Bernhardt wrote that he was reorganizing his division because the associate solicitors’ original status as political appointees undermined the division’s effectiveness.
“This has resulted in frequent turnover in those positions, often with an attendant loss in productivity and management continuity in these Divisions, despite the best efforts of the newly-appointed Associate Solicitors,” he wrote.
But environmental advocates, and some rank-and-file Interior officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of hurting their careers, said the reassignments represent the Bush administration’s effort to leave a lasting imprint on environmental policy.
“What’s clear is they could have done this during the eight years they were in office. Why are they doing it now?” said Robert Irvin, senior vice president for conservation programs at Defenders of Wildlife, an advocacy group. “It’s pretty obvious they’re trying to leave in place some of their loyal foot soldiers in their efforts to reduce environmental protection.”
In an interview yesterday, Bernhardt reiterated that he thinks the move is in the government’s long-term interest.
“I believe these management decisions will strengthen the professionalism of the Office of the Solicitor and result in greater service to the Department of the Interior,” he said. “However, the next solicitor and the department’s management team are free to walk a different path.”
One senior Interior official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss personnel matters, said an incoming interior secretary or solicitor could create new political positions upon taking office and could shift Senior Executive Service officials to comparable jobs within a few months. As a general rule, career SES employees may be reassigned involuntarily within their current commuting area within 15 days, and beyond their commuting area within 60 days, but they retain their lucrative and permanent government posts. When a new agency head is appointed, he or she must wait 120 days before reassigning career SES officials.
Outside groups are trying to monitor these moves but are powerless to reverse them. Alex Bastani, a representative at the Labor Department for the American Federation of Government Employees, said it took months for that agency even to acknowledge that two of its Bush appointees, Carrie Snidar and Brad Mantel, had gotten civil service posts.
“They’re trying to burrow into these career jobs, and we’re very upset,” Bastani said. “Everyone should have an opportunity to apply for these positions. And certainly career people who don’t have partisan bent and have 10 or 15 years in their respective fields should have a shot at these positions.”
Kerry Weems, acting chief of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said he discourages political staff from moving into career slots. “It typically doesn’t work out for either party,” he said. Even though Weems is a career staffer, he expects to leave the administration when the Obama team takes over.
Alphonso Jackson, who was HUD secretary under President Bush, warned his political appointees not to try to burrow in when the administration changed. But one of his regional directors objected to that flat-out prohibition, according to union leaders at HUD, and has told his colleagues that he has been promised first crack at a career position.
Staff writers Ceci Connolly and Spencer S. Hsu contributed to this report.
Well! It quite simply does not end. So much for “we the people,” who are not connected or can’t “PAY TO PLAY”.
So, all you much maligned “servants”, please give us a thought or two and please list your personal sacrifices. I will be the first to applaud and recognize you for such.
It has been several interesting days, since Political Bad Boy Blagojevich was arrested for a “political crime spree” that rendered several politicians shocked and awed. Well! You say,”shocked and awed”.
Isn’t that a gross exagerration of what you really felt.
Aren’t you seriously overstating your reaction?
How could those of us witnessing this, not suffer any of those shocking and compelling reactions?
Those of us who witnessed this via cable news, and are not elected officials, nor are we Federal Prosecutors, thought “so what’s new”? Why did we not have any of those reactions? Because it is what we expect. On a regular and ongoing basis. Again and Again and Again.
How would Watergate rate against this? (Suggested by Gov. Blago on Monday, December 8, during an appearance at Republic Window & Door during an employee protest regarding their job loss).
Blago, I suggest you ask former presidential candidate Pat Buchanan or former Special Counsel to the Nixon Administration John W. Dean. They can answer that question for you.
This “stuck as Governor” Bad Boy on a political crime spree makes our days. He inspires us to further our grassroots campaign to end the culture of corruption that is so pervasive in government. When we don’t think we can stand another political spin from the spinners, another ill gotten bailout, another self aggrandizing political statement, his arrogance, narcissism, and what his co-horts call delusional political reality rears its’ ugly head and the media goes crazy all over again. We thank you!
The spinners start spinning, my head starts spinning, the phones start ringing, the dog barks, and anyone who has ever spoken to this tough guy “stuck Governor” runs for cover as if they were walking through Baghdad and Blackwater was on patrol.
There is a deafening silence until some artful dodger AKA a high ranking Illinois State official, Senate or House leader throws the media a bone with an artfully prepared statement saying nothing other than that they are shocked and awed. The tone is set for what should and should not be said, while any and all in the sphere of influence of this man are making and releasing their politically correct and partisan statements. LET’S END THE POLITICAL CORRECTNESS AND CALL A SPADE A SPADE. The constituents of Illinois need to immediately call for his resignation AND the Illinois General Assembly must rigorously begin impeachment proceedings. Illinois State Attorney General Lisa Madigan is also preparing to go the the Illinois Supreme Court and have him declared unfit to serve.
The US Senate Democratic Caucus (50 members) issued the following letter: (from swamppolitics.com)
December 10, 2008
Dear Governor Blagojevich:
We write to insist that you step down as Governor of Illinois and under no circumstance make an appointment to fill the vacant Illinois Senate seat.
In light of your arrest yesterday on alleged federal corruption charges related to that Senate seat, any appointment by you would raise serious questions.
It is within the authority of the Illinois legislature to remove your power to make this appointment by providing for a special election. But a decision by you to resign or to step aside under Article V of the Illinois Constitution would be the most expeditious way for a new Senator to be chosen and seated in a manner that would earn the confidence of the people of Illinois and all Americans. We consider it imperative that a new senator be seated as soon as possible so that Illinois is fully represented in the Senate as the important work of the 111th Congress moves forward.
Please understand that should you decide to ignore the request of the Senate Democratic Caucus and make an appointment we would be forced to exercise our Constitutional authority under Article I, Section 5, to determine whether such a person should be seated.
We do not prejudge the outcome of the criminal charges against you or question your constitutional right to contest those charges. But for the good of the Senate and our nation, we implore you to refrain from making an appointment to the Senate.
Earlier in the day, the senior senator from Illinois, Richard Durbin, sent a letter to Blagojevich asking him to step down. It was a reversal for Durbin, who just Tuesday said that such calls were premature, and that Blagojevich deserved a full and fair trial on corruption charges. Although even then, he said that the state would be better off with a new chief executive.
Here is that text of that letter.
Dear Governor Blagojevich:
I am writing to ask you to step down as Governor of Illinois. Beyond guilt or innocence, the charges against you raise serious questions about your ability to carry out your duties as chief executive of our state.
I also ask you not to appoint the next United States Senator from Illinois. Because of the nature of the charges against you, no matter whom you were to select, that individual would be under a cloud of suspicion. That would not serve our state, our nation, or the United States Senate.
Legislative efforts to impeach you or remove your ability to appoint the replacement for the United States Senate have been initiated but those options could take some time accomplish. I urge you to choose the path that will be the most beneficial for the people of Illinois and the nation, and resign immediately.
At this moment, I am the only United State Senator from Illinois and within weeks we will begin the next Congress facing unprecedented challenges. Illinois should not be underrepresented in the Senate during this critical time in our history.
I urge you to search your heart and summon the strength to put your state and your nation above any personal considerations.
Richard J. Durbin
The two errors in Senator Durbin’s request is that first there must be an assumption that he has a pumping heart, and clearly he has no conscience to make a selfless consideration for his state and nation. The appeal was well intended, but stay tuned. I am certain that the Honorable Senator Durbin will yet again have another take on this in a few days as the CLIMATE changes. There must be some sunshine out there. Clearly Gov. Blago thought so on Monday when he invited the world to “tape” his calls both openly and notoriously.
LONG TERM FORCAST: TORNADIC
Public outcry toward Bad Boy Blago and his media friendly wife Lady Macbeth (a media reference) heightens while as public servants they continue to count their personal sacrifices.
No board to be appointed to.
No Secretarial appointment in the new Administration.
No Warren Buffet Foundation to lead.
No SEIU Union to defraud.
Clearly A GREAT PERSONAL TRADEGY at the very least.
I heard one political strategist suggest that if this had been a republican that was arrested, that the Federal Prosecutor and the media would be making a point of emphasizing his party affiliation. Geez, I didn’t think corruption had a party. I thought it was a state of political being. A characterization. A REALITY, if you will Mr. Spinner. I don’t THINK Patrick Fitzgerald cares about PARTY affiliation when he investigates. Are you suggesting that he does? Some of us don’t give a hoot about what party it is, we care that it happens. REPEATEDLY!!!!
A self serving vote, a tainted dollar, a sold vote, an illegal contribution. It happens! REPEATEDLY!!!
Please all you strategists, review your banter and edit your political “wittisisms” before going on air and exposing us to this idiocy. You look a fool! It irritates CLINICAL THINKERS. We are AWED that you have left personal integrity and decency out of your rhetoric. That you will SPIN THE TRUTH to further your political agenda! Alas! I am shocked and awed.
I can deal with the crime spree, I can’t deal with the nonsense by some spinners.
UPDATE: Dec. 15, 2008
UPDATE: Dec. 11, 2008
Since I started this rant the bailout has passed the house. It sucks! We better hope and pray the Senate has more common sense and sends EVERYONE back to the drawing board or we will be revisiting this issue early next year.
My first inclination was an emphatic NO NO NO!
I have a billion questions about this whole situation … I will not list them here since there certainly is not the time, space or bandwidth to cover it all.
After putting a bit of “Clinical Thought” to it all I have decided it is a must on some level.
There is no point in the “blame game” we need to embrace the “fix game”. I looking over the offered solutions and those promoting them it crossed my mind NOT MANY offering solutions have ever run a business.
Come to think of it most would probably fall flat on their faces in the real business world. So they are offering a business solution?
HOW SMART IS THAT?
Let me answer that for you … NOT VERY.
Add to all of that who they are “sleeping with” (lobbyist “payoff” “kickback” “campaign donations”) and we have further skewed solutions.
How about we kick “Politically Correct” aside and call a spade a spade.
That whole can of worms is another article by someone wiser than I coming soon.
Handing over billions with a CAR CZAR to oversee?
Who the heck would want that job?
It will be most interesting to see who has the real wherewithal and guts to step up to that plate.
Anyway so far what I have seen appears to be pouring TAX PAYER MONEY down a rat hole.
What is expected of this program?
Is this a warning shot across the bough of all auto workers?
Get prepared to lose your jobs in 6 mos.?
Here are the down and dirty facts … you think you can’t survive on what you make today?
Well how well are you going to survive on zilch?
If you think you can count on the government as a safety net you are sadly mistaken.
If you think you can count on your union you are equally sadly mistaken … both ARE/HAVE/WILL miserably fail you.
Keep in mind YOU ARE BOSS OF THE UNION not vice versa … make your voices heard before you are in some unemployment line while your company/union bosses are sipping mojitos in Dubai.
You want to know why the Banks got bailed out with few questions asked?
The bailers saw their own asses slipping into the great abyss.
Its called VESTED INTEREST!
NOW “Barney Baby”, “Pelosi the Shrew” Dodd and a whole slew of others are safe and can make an example.
YOU AUTO MAKERS ARE IT!
I just ran into the latest Republican Solution (below).
It would be refreshing if both sides of the isle FOR ONCE drop partisanship and hammer out a solution to help get an ICONIC industry back on its feet.
There are no better workers in the world than here in the USA there are just cheaper workers elsewhere. For those who say these American companies can not compete? The naysayers ARE DAFFED!
Perhaps a level playing field would help.
WASHINGTON, DC – House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH), Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA), Conference Chairman Mike Pence (R-IN), and other House GOP leaders today put forth an alternative to the $15 billion taxpayer-funded auto bailout proposed by House Democratic leaders.
The American Automotive Reorganization and Recovery Plan
Working families throughout our country are struggling to pay their bills and facing economic anxieties not seen in America for generations. Employers are finding themselves torn between staying in business and laying off people over the holidays. Nowhere are these challenges more acute than in states that are heavily dependent on auto manufacturing. It is essential that Washington address these challenges not through taxpayer-funded bailouts that prolong working families’ pain and put taxpayers’ money at risk, but by fixing problems and removing barriers that make it harder for working families to prosper.
Washington has failed this basic test with respect to the American auto industry. Republicans want to make certain that in its response to the resulting crisis, Washington does not fail American taxpayers as well. A responsible plan should do two things: it should protect taxpayers, and it should help auto workers and their families by allowing the Big Three to become competitive again. The Democrats’ plan does neither. Congress should not be stampeded into rubber-stamping a plan that guarantees failure at the taxpayers’ expense.
The Democratic Bailout proposal has three fundamental flaws:
- The only thing crazier than trusting the same management and union officials who got the Big Three into this mess to get them out is trusting a bunch of Washington politicians and bureaucrats – the very same people who ran up a $455 billion deficit last year. American auto workers and their families deserve better.
- If no private investors believe the Big Three restructuring plans are realistic enough to support with their own money, why should we put up taxpayer money? American taxpayers deserve better.
- The Big Three restructuring plan and the Democratic proposal lack accountability. There is no guarantee that once they get taxpayer money the restructuring they promise will occur. Once the taxpayers prop them up once, there will be a big incentive to keep bailing them out – keeping the industry dependent on government aid and further denying American auto workers the security of a viable industry that is back on its feet and ready to compete. American auto workers and their families deserve better.
What We Should Be Doing: The American Automotive Reorganization and Recovery Plan
On December 2, the Big Three presented to Congress their plans for restructuring. While the plans included laudable goals, too few details were provided as to how the companies will actually achieve the restructuring and the savings they have promised. In some instances new agreements to achieve the savings would not be entered into for months or perhaps years.
The Big Three must lock in the restructuring they have promised in a matter of weeks, not months or years. Congress should instead establish firm benchmarks and a tight timeline for
restructuring. Such benchmarks will include for example requiring that by March 31, 2009 each company should reach agreement whereby:
- The companies’ creditors agree to a framework to reduce each company’s indebtedness by at least 1/3.
- The UAW holds to concessions already made and further:
o Concedes the elimination of Supplemental Unemployment Benefits;
o Concedes elimination of the Jobs Bank Program;
o Agrees to either reduce company retiree health care obligations or otherwise convert a portion of such obligations into equity; and
o Agrees to reduce wages and benefits to the levels paid by non-Big Three manufacturers.
A Process for Reaching Expedited Agreement, Instead of Nationalizing America’s Auto Companies
Because of the many legal and contractual hurdles to restructuring, the companies are urged to accomplish their restructuring through the use of a pre-packaged bankruptcy or another mechanism to bring all stakeholders to the table for an agreed-upon determination of their future. It is important that these stakeholders reach reasonable compromises amongst themselves. Creating a government bureaucracy or a “car czar” to arbitrarily pass judgment on the thousands of details involved with a restructuring is akin to nationalizing the auto companies.
The Big Three may need some form of interim financing as they finalize their restructuring. In normal economic times, if their restructuring plan is considered viable, such financing should be available in the private market. Because of the current credit crisis, limited assistance may be appropriate in the form of insurance, rather than a taxpayer-funded government bailout that replaces private investment. We propose that the government provide insurance, funded by the participants with a modest FDIC-like fee, which would cover up to 50 percent of the losses of new investment in the case of default, helping to unlock immediate private investment (not unlike debtor in possession financing). Such insurance would expire on March 31, 2009. This proposal ensures that taxpayers are protected and provides a powerful incentive for the Big Three to quickly implement their restructuring plans.
Its a start so get your dead asses to work and earn the paycheck and benefits that are way to high for the amount of successful work you crank out for “we the people”.
The PDF is HERE
My political awareness began in 1960 as a youngster sitting on my father’s lap watching Walter Cronkite report the news during the John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon campaigns. My father, while not an immigrant was JFK’s age, and like him was an Irish Catholic. There was an immediate connection between my family and the soon to be leader of the “New Frontier”.
Much in common?
Not so much in common?
My maternal family were all immigrants, having come through Ellis Island. They came here not for religious freedom nor for political freedom, but to the greatest country in the world to give their families a better life. Anything was possible in America. Land of the free, home of the brave. A government “of the people, by the people, and for the people”.
I wonder now; given the “state of the union” and the “of the people, by the people, and for the people,” what decision they would make in 2008. They loved being Americans and their naturalization was the source of great celebration. They voted religiously, getting someone to interpret for them when they didn’t understand an issue.
My grandmother’s last vote was in 1996, at 95 years old. She would have considered it a mortal sin not to vote in an election. My mother’s first vote was in 2008 at the age of 86. She who lived through the great depression, through the civil rights movement, (she was a civil rights activist in her stay at home mom sort of way), and had a son serve in the military during Vietnam was thrilled that she cast her first vote ever for the first African American to become President of the United States.
She describes it as the most important thing she could ever have voted for. He gave her hope for the renewal of the America her family had ventured across seas to be a part of. Her reasons for not voting prior to this election are to remain hers.
Politics were “table topics” in our home and often still are. During the early 1960’s talk was of the beginning of the Peace Corps, Man on the Moon, Civil Rights, Vietnam, Cuban Missile Crisis, and Charles de Gaulle. Today it is hope, change, despair and often followed by a longing for when it wasn’t as corrupt, as scandalous, and elected officials crimes aren’t the breaking news of the day).
During the 60’s I sat intent on soaking up all I could about American politics and how great America was. I hadn’t even started having history lessons in school yet and I was addicted. I questioned anyone who was willing to listen and began making up my own mind about what their opinions meant to me and to the world.
Smiling politely to all who answered my inquiring mind, I walked away with my own opinions. I was teased from the time I was very young that I would make a great politician because of the logic of my arguments. I could see the amazement from my parents and family members when I felt brave enough to voice those political beliefs and thoughts. I became a clinical thinker long before I knew the philosophical differences between a Republican and a Democrat.
While I have been clinically trained to keep passion and emotion away from my thinking in order to avoid becoming an idealogical conspiratorial thinker, I remain at this time, in this moment, a clinical thinker that screams at political corruption, partisan politics, partisan political spins that the “spinner” believes I will “blindly see” as the one, holy, apolostolic truth of their partisan political BS, while they continue to formulate their every press release to further their ideolgical position. Be it left or right, cut the crap, you sound ridiculous when you spin the truth to further partisan beliefs.
After years of being politically active in various local and state campaigns for a variety of candidates, of varied political idealogy, I walked away from that involvement. Until somewhat recently, I have simply kept a “mindseye” on the machine called government. I have ranted and raged about “spin”, corruption, partisanship, self serving elected officials, being considered unAmerican or antiAmerican because of my views on the war.
Called unpatriotic by those who consider my views of the past 8 years just that. I believe in the Constitution of the United States and its preservation. Its’ intent. Its’ integrity. I can now no longer “simply be” and share my rantings with other clinical thinkers. I must lend myself to making a difference through real political activism. To quote a famous movie line, “I’m mad as hell and I am not going to take it anymore.” It is time for us to STAND & BE COUNTED, TAKE BACK GOVERNMENT, RENEW OUR HOPE, FIGHT AGAINST CORRUPTION, and see AMERICA’S GREATNESS RESTORED.
I believe that:
We the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union…must RAISE OUR VOICES!
Another clinical thinker and I know from experience that when we do, we can fall buildings.
Please join the movement to make this country once again “we the people” and a government “of the people, by the people, and for the people”. Join the blog, or contact your elected officials and remind them that you are watching their every move carefully, that you are prepared to work to unseat them if they fail to serve the public trust as an elected official, that if they cast one self serving vote, accept one tainted dollar, sell one vote, or they act or believe that being a member of Congress exempts them from acting with honor and integrity because their fellow associates will allow this behavior, REMIND THEM THAT YOU WILL NOT.