Brinksmanship.
That’s according to this report that was being passed around on Twitter earlier. In the spirit of the season, and since his vacation’s off to a, er, bad start, I’ll raise a glass of eggnog to The One for this. The delegation that visited Beijing included Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg and Jeff Bader, [...]
EXCERPTS:
When bureaucrats talk about increasing your “access” to X, Y, or Z, what they’re really talking about is increasing their control over your lives exponentially. As it is with the government health care takeover, so it is with the newly-approved government plan to “increase” Internet “access.” Call it Webcare.
The “neutrality” is brazenly undermined by preferential treatment toward wireless broadband networks. Moreover, the FCC’s scheme is widely opposed by Congress – and has already been rejected once in the courts.
Undaunted promoters of Obama FCC chairman Julius Genachowski’s “open Internet” plan to expand regulatory authority over the Internet have couched their online power grab in the rhetoric of civil rights.
Face it: A high-speed connection is no more an essential civil right than 3G cell phone service or a Netflix account. Increasing competition and restoring academic excellence in abysmal public schools is far more of an imperative to minority children than handing them iPads. Once again, Democrats are using children as human shields who provide useful cover for not-so-noble political goals.
You are not going to believe some of the things that the U.S. government is spending money on. According to a shocking new report, U.S. taxpayer money is being spent to study World of Warcraft, to study how Americans find love on the Internet, and to study the behavior of male prostitutes in Vietnam. Not only that, but money from the federal government is also being used to renovate a pizzeria in Iowa and to help a library in Tennessee host video game parties. These are just some of the examples in a new report on government waste from Senator Tom Coburn entitled “Wastebook 2010“. Even as tens of millions of American families find themselves suffering through the worst economic downturn in modern history, the U.S. government continues to spend money on some of the craziest and most frivolous things imaginable. Every single year articles are written and news stories are done about the horrific government waste that is taking place and yet every single year it just keeps getting worse. So just what in the world is going on here?
It almost seems as though Congress actually enjoys inventing new ways to waste U.S. taxpayer money. It seems nearly inconceivable that anyone could keep a straight face while trying to justify spending money on many of the things in the list below.
At a time when the U.S. national debt is closing in on 14 trillion dollars, government waste just seems more out of control than ever. The following are 20 of the craziest things that the U.S. government is spending money on….
#1 A total of $3 million has been granted to researchers at the University of California at Irvine so that they can play video games such as World of Warcraft. The goal of this “video game research” is reportedly to study how “emerging forms of communication, including multiplayer computer games and online virtual worlds such as World of Warcraft and Second Life can help organizations collaborate and compete more effectively in the global marketplace.”
#2 The U.S. Department of Agriculture gave the University of New Hampshire $700,000 this year to study methane gas emissions from dairy cows.
#3 $615,000 was given to the University of California at Santa Cruz to digitize photos, T-shirts and concert tickets belonging to the Grateful Dead.
#4 A professor at Stanford University received $239,100 to study how Americans use the Internet to find love. So far one of the key findings of this “research” is that the Internet is a safer and more discreet way to find same-sex partners.
#5 The National Science Foundation spent $216,000 to study whether or not politicians “gain or lose support by taking ambiguous positions.”
#6 The National Institutes of Health spent approximately $442,340 to study the behavior of male prostitutes in Vietnam.
#7 Approximately $1 million of U.S. taxpayer money was used to create poetry for the Little Rock, New Orleans, Milwaukee and Chicago zoos. The goal of the “poetry” is to help raise awareness on environmental issues.
#8 The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs spent $175 million during 2010 to maintain hundreds of buildings that it does not even use. This includes a pink, octagonal monkey house in the city of Dayton, Ohio.
#9 $1.8 million of U.S. taxpayer dollars went for a “museum of neon signs” in Las Vegas, Nevada.
#10 $35 million was reportedly paid out by Medicare to 118 “phantom” medical clinics that never even existed. Apparently these “phantom” medical clinics were established by a network of criminal gangs as a way to defraud the U.S. government.
#11 The Conservation Commission of Monkton, Vermont got $150,000 from the federal government to construct a “critter crossing”. Thanks to U.S. government money, the lives of “thousands” of migrating salamanders are now being saved.
#12 In California, one park received $440,000 in federal funds to perform “green energy upgrades” on a building that has not been used for a decade.
#13 $440,955 was spent this past year on an office for former Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert that he rarely even visits.
#14 One Tennessee library was given $5,000 in federal funds to host a series of video game parties.
#15 The U.S. Census Bureau spent $2.5 million on a television commercial during the Super Bowl that was so poorly produced that virtually nobody understood what is was trying to say.
#16 A professor at Dartmouth University received $137,530 to create a “recession-themed” video game entitled “Layoff”.
#17 The National Science Foundation gave the Minnesota Zoo over $600,000 so that they could develop an online video game called “Wolfquest”.
#18 A pizzeria in Iowa was given $60,000 to renovate the pizzeria’s facade and give it a more “inviting feel”.
#19 The U.S. Department of Agriculture gave one enterprising group of farmers $30,000 to develop a tourist-friendly database of farms that host guests for overnight “haycations”. This one sounds like something that Dwight Schrute would have dreamed up.
#20 Almost unbelievably, the National Institutes of Health was given $800,000 in “stimulus funds” to study the impact of a “genital-washing program” on men in South Africa.
In light of all this, is it any wonder why the approval rating of Congress recently hit another new record low?
According to the most recent Gallup poll, only 13 percent of Americans approve of the job that Congress is doing.
Just think about that – only 13 percent!
Our politicians seem very confused about why there is so much anger in the country today. Well, there are certainly a lot of reasons for it, including the fact that the U.S. economy is on the verge of collapse, but it certainly doesn’t help that our government is basically flushing our tax dollars down the toilet and spending them on some of the most wasteful things imaginable.
It would be bad enough if the federal government was swimming in money, but the truth is that all of this waste is being committed at a time when the U.S. government is nearing bankruptcy.
Over the last 30 years, the U.S. national debt has gotten 13 times larger. We have accumulated the largest debt in the history of the world and there is no end in sight.
In fact, we are rapidly running out of people to borrow money from. According to the Wall Street Journal, in order to repay maturing bonds and finance the exploding budget deficit, the U.S. government will have to borrow 4.2 trillion dollars in 2011.
Eventually the rest of the world is going to lose confidence in the ability of the U.S. government to repay all of this debt. Once confidence in U.S. Treasuries is totally gone, and there are already signs this is starting to happen, the game will be over and the U.S. financial system will collapse.
But the U.S. Congress just continues to act like it is “business as usual” and the wasteful spending just continues to get worse. Someday historians will look back and think that we must have been a nation full of idiots and morons.
For decades our politicians have been spending us into oblivion, yet we keep sending the vast majority of them back to Washington D.C. every time an election rolls around and the mainstream media keeps assuring us that our “respected leaders” know exactly what they are doing and that everything is going to be okay somehow.
It is almost as if some sort of collective insanity has overtaken most Americans. The path we are on inevitably leads to national bankruptcy and the destruction of our financial system, but only a small percentage of the population seems to care.
Well, in the end we will reap what we have sown. Unfortunately, the economic pain that is coming is going to be devastating for all of us – including those of us who are awake and are trying desperately to change things.
Michael T. Snyder is a graduate of the McIntire School of Commerce at
the University of Virginia and has a law degree from the University of
Florida. He is an attorney that has worked for some of the largest
and most prominent law firms in Washington D.C. and who now resides
outside of Seattle, Washington. He is a very active blogger and is
also a respected researcher, writer, speaker and activist.
EXCERPTS:
For now, major governments such as the US and EU have been able to continue to borrow and spend licentiously to fend off the threat of deflation and keep their economies stimulated (the US is by far the greater offender).
But three surprising and powerful changes threaten the viability of a long-promised “exit strategy.”
If the central banks of the EU and the US choose to unleash even more massive reflationary programs, then a period of crippling inflation could be the outcome. This will form the basis of monetary chaos and prolonged economic stagnation, the most damaging of all economic conditions. In these circumstances, the prices of needed raw materials and commodities, including precious metals and energy, would explode in dollar terms.
One of the founding myths of the modern global financial system was that governments, especially of the developed democracies, could borrow endlessly without consequence.
If you can see this, then you might need a Flash Player upgrade or you need to install Flash Player if it's missing. Get Flash Player from Adobe.
The people of San Francisco may vote on a ballot measure that would outlaw circumcision.
Supporters of the bill say the decision to permanently remove a boy’s foreskin should not be made by parents.
The Huffington Post reported:
"San Francisco residents may vote on a ballot measure next year that would outlaw circumcision.
The initiative, which requires 7,000 signatures before it can be added to next November’s ballot, would make it a misdemeanor to “circumcise, excise, cut or mutilate the…genitals” of all minors, and would not make exceptions for religious reasons.
The decision to permanently remove a boy’s foreskin should not be made by parents, says Lloyd Shofield, the proposal’s author.“People can practice whatever religion they want, but your religious practice ends with someone else’s body,” Schofield told CBS affiliate KCBS. “It’s a man’s body and…his body doesn’t belong to his culture, his government, his religion or even his parents. It’s his decision.”
Afshan Azad, 22, who plays Padma Patil in the “Harry Potter” film series remains in hiding. She refused to appear in a London court and press charges, no doubt because she knows there’s no way the British police can protect her. It is open Islamic season on Ms. Azad.
What has she done to bring down the wrath of Allah? Ms. Azad’s boyfriend is Hindi, a non-Muslim.
And according to the racist, misogynist doctrine of the Islamists, she is a traitor to the umma, the transnational Muslim community, hence deserving a death sentence.
Actress Afshan Azad is in hiding.
Ms. Azad’s father, Abul Azad, 53, and her brother Ashraf, 28, labeled her a “prostitute” when they discovered her secret boyfriend. Her brother beat her and her father threatened to kill her after she refused an arranged marriage with a Muslim man. Ms. Azad escaped her family home by climbing through a bedroom window. She has been in hiding ever since. And I’m afraid that like the Seattle cartoonist Molly Norris and so many others, she will remain in hiding for the rest of her life.
Just so we understand what’s going on: this is the norm in the Muslim world. Women who dare enter a relationship with non-Muslims are fair game for an honor killing, usually proceeded by various forms of unspeakable torture.
You would think that Ms. Azad’s case would sweep through Hollywood like a prairie fire, with celebrities stepping forward to condemn Islam’s war against women and offer support to this unfortunate young actress and the millions of Muslim women who live in perpetual fear of their lives. And hey, Hollywood is stuffed with card carrying feminists. So doesn’t it make sense that western women—specifically liberals who are always lecturing cave dwelling conservatives about social justice and human rights—would surge forward like an angry wave in support of their sister?
But gee willikers, listen to the silence.
My colleagues in the film business absolutely a-dore causes.
They sport really cute AIDS and breast cancer ribbons at every opportunity. Global warming—rebranded as climate change—is, natch, the fashion forward cocktail shmooze of the moment. Park in any studio lot and you’ll see a dozen “Free Tibet” bumper stickers, as if Tibet will ever be free from the mass murdering Chinese.
But talk to film people about the oppression of women in the Muslim world, specifically honor killings, and you’ll be met with either blank stares or a stumbling explanation about the moral complexities of judging third world cultures.
In short, western liberals in Hollywood and elsewhere, most notably so-called feminists, have abandoned the human rights of Muslim women in the name of multicultural gibberish. It’s okay to let women be slaughtered by their fanatic families because we, as depraved western oppressors, have no right to tell the natives how to live.
Which is a pretty good description of dhimmitude.
In fact, western liberals are the perfect dhimmis. Accepting and condoning the violence of Muslims is exactly what the Islamists want. Why do you think it’s a hate crime to burn a Koran, but urinating on a crucifix is considered art?
The reason liberals can moan about Tibet is because they really don’t have to do anything. Just slap on the dopey bumper sticker and yadda-yadda about what a great guy is the Dalai Lama and your progressive credentials are totally up to date. You can go to your yoga class or faculty meeting and feel the love. Liberals are not going to go up against the ruthless and murderous Chinese who have turned Tibet into a massive killing field. They just want to feel good about themselves. It’s the nirvana of self-righteousness liberals seek.
But to confront Islam, violent and fanatic, actually takes courage. Because, let’s face it, Islamists are homicidal maniacs who take great pride in rioting, maiming, raping, torturing and beheading. Why else do you think they go to such lengths to broadcast their atrocities on You Tube?
And now that one of Hollywood’s own, Afshan Azad, 22, a fine young actress, is in hiding because her father and brother are determined to murder her, well, I’m sure Hollywood will sigh with compassion, and then move on because the part can always be recast.
This moral nothingness perfectly compliments the barbarism of the Islamist world. One cannot survive without the other. They are, in clinical terms, enablers.
Yesterday, Pigford report co-author Peter Schweizer spoke to a specific USDA inside job wherein a federal employee was getting paid by Pigford lawyers to illegally sign up fraudulent claimants. Today, former Secretary of the Department of Agriculture Mike Espy, who now represents thousands of Pigford II claimants, says there is “no doubt” that he has heard those reports, and furthermore says there are FBI investigations that have looked into these troubling allegations. This comports with the Big Government witness report from a retired FBI agent who is willing to testify that he has evidence of widespread fraud involving Pigford claimants in Arkansas and a USDA employee, who still is on the job.
This is not tying Mike Espy into any fraud. This is just showing that what Big Government has been reporting is common knowledge amongst many Pigford insiders.
This video preview concludes the pre-Christmas roll-out of the Big Government Pigford report and ongoing documentary production. There are many more blockbuster interviews to come. More Pigileaks, as well. Even though the media continues conspicuously to ignore our revelations, we know that behind the scenes, Pigford principals are scrambling for cover and investigative bodies have been jump-started into action.
Much, much more to come in the New Year.
RELATED: Testimony: FBI Investigated ‘Broker’ Who Allegedly Recruited Pigford Claimants for Commission Cash
They're emailing each other?
The release today of documents, emails and various exchanges between Mayor Bloomberg and radical Rauf and his motley crew of Islamic supremacists shows evidence of collusion and inappropriate poltical support/favoritism of the Ground Zero mega mosque. It's worse than we imagined.
Mayor Bloomberg's offices went to extraordinary lengths for the radicals trying to build a mega mosque at Ground Zero -- even writing a letter to the community board for them, newly released documents show. Is it any wonder that radical Rauf and Daisy the Khan were so confident at the landmark hearings?
Which begs the question: why is the Mayor breaking ethical rules for a slumlord with radical ties whose buildings were in receivership?
The dotty, irrational Mayor has shown no such favoritism towards the rebuilding of the 96-year-old St. Nicholas church at Ground Zero. It remains vanquished by Muslim terrorists, despite the ten-year battle by Church officials, frustrated in their attempts to rebuild.
Judicial Watch filed freedom of information act requests for correspondence between New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf concerning the Islamic mosque and cultural center he plans to build a few blocks from Ground Zero. More here.
The Mayor failed to release these documents back in August. It took an additional six months to get Bloomberg to comply with this request. Now we know why, and what he was hiding.
The records of communication between the Office of the Mayor and Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf concerning the Cordoba Initiative’s proposed Cordoba House project show that the Mayor, on more than one occasion, improperly collaborated with Rauf and co.
Why did Bloomberg help the Cordoba Initiative write its letter to the landmark commission, altering and making suggestions and revisions to Rauf's letter?
Why did the city intervene on behalf of Rauf in securing the permits from the building department for assembly permits in a building destroyed in the 911 attacks?
Researchers have finally discovered that the eco-bulbs, are hazardous to one’s health if broken.
They warn the toxic materials in these bulbs should cause alarm among the people.
These dim bulbs finally realized there is a problem?
In light of the recent ham-fisted power grab by the FCC, the dissenting statements of commissioners who do not want the government to seize the Internet by the throat make interesting reading.
From Robert M. McDowell:
What had been bottom-up, non-governmental, and grassroots based Internet governance will become politicized. Today, the United States is abandoning the longstanding bipartisan and international consensus to insulate the Internet from state meddling in favor of a preference for top-down control by unelected political appointees, three of whom will decide what constitutes "reasonable" behavior. …
The Order's expansive grasp for jurisdictional power here is likely to alarm any reviewing court because the effort appears to have no limiting principle. If we were to accept the Order's argument, "it would virtually free the Commission from its congressional tether." "As the [Supreme] Court explained in Midwest Video II, 'without reference to the provisions of the Act' expressly granting regulatory authority, 'the Commission's [ancillary] jurisdiction … would be unbounded.'" I am relieved, however, that in the Order, the Commission is explicitly refraining from regulating coffee shops.
In short, if this Order stands, there is no end in sight to the Commission's powers. I also have concerns regarding the constitutional implications of the Order, especially its trampling on the First and Fifth Amendments.
I keep returning to what should be a threshold question: why do we intervene in the one sector of the economy that is working so well to create high-paying jobs, untold consumer choice, and entrepreneurial opportunity?
The answer: because it is working so well to create high-paying jobs, untold consumer choice, and entrepreneurial opportunity. But Big Government will fix that.
Baker narrows her objections to Orwellian 'Net Neutrality' to the top seven:
First, the factual record does not support government intervention. Second, the majority's claim that consumers will benefit from this government overreach is unsupported and deeply flawed. Third, the majority's focus on preserving network operators' current conditions will distort tomorrow's Internet. Fourth, the majority puts the Commission in the unworkable role of Internet referee. Fifth, the majority fails to marshal a sustainable legal foundation. Sixth, the majority's decision to act a legislator, not regulator, is a mistake that may undermine our agency's mission. And, lastly, opportunity cost. By that I mean, we have squandered months on this effort, diverting resources and political capital away from real problems that lie within our core competencies, like universal service and spectrum reform.
When people look back on the Age of Obama and ask the inevitable question, 'Why didn't somebody stop them?' at least McDowell and Baker will be able to say they tried.
On a tip from Kevin R.
"It seems that Big Government created a very small number of jobs with the massive piles of future generations' money that have been flushed down 'stimulus' projects. But this isn't exactly true. Actually, the government created an extremely small number of jobs. As always, when bureaucrats count, the numbers don't add up:
Some California agencies that received federal stimulus funding overstated the number of jobs created from the funds, and recipients of funding handed out by agencies might have also misstated the number of jobs created.
Those are the findings of the California State Auditor, which examined stimulus funding in California and released the results Tuesday. The auditor found that agencies might have overstated the number of full-time equivalent positions by 617.
The report recommends that state agencies be required to ensure jobs are not triple-counted when totals are mistakenly summed instead of averaged.
There's an idea. But don't expect it to be implemented in California any time soon.
On a tip from Jaye.
"The.. 111th Congress.. goes down in history as having written more laws affecting more people than any Congress since the Great Society of the 1960s. The legislative achievements include health care reform that gives 32 million Americans coverage, the most sweeping Wall Street reform since the Great Depression, the spending of $1.67 billion to revive the economy, including tax cuts and stimulus to create 3 million jobs, construction of roads and bridges, initial steps towards green energy projects, an end to the ban on gays serving openly in the military, and a massive nuclear arms reduction treaty with Russia.It's time for the America voter to understand.
Polls this week give President Obama an approval rating of 56 percent for his handling of the lame duck Congress, with 41 percent dis-approving.
Observers see a possible weakening of solidarity in the ranks of Republican senators, with a number of them having crossed over on several issues to support President Obama.
Alaska's Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski backed all four of President Obama's signature initiatives in the lame duck session - repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, the tax cut compromise, the START Treaty and the DREAM Act.
 |
| Jarvis Tyner campaigning for Obama, Salem Oregon, 2008 |
There is a lively discussion in left progressive circles about the response to the tax (and unemployment insurance) extension compromise, and where to go after the midterm election set back. Left and progressive activists and voters have played a very important role in the fight against the extreme right-wing. I think most left people understand that the main danger to democracy and progress is coming from the extreme right, GOP/tea party and their powerful corporate backers.
The Communist Party will not agree with our liberal allies at every turn, but we keep pushing for unity, we keep working to find the tactics that keep a broad labor and people's coalition, that keeps the movement for change going.
In my view, too many people are arguing that the compromise tax bill 'is the last straw' and 'I'm through with Obama.' This view singles out the tax breaks for the rich and largely ignores the concessions the GOP had to make to the working class....
In my opinion, a winning strategy has to be based on the real world; on the facts, not on subjective feelings that we all understandably have at this point. Serious change makers should not let those feelings be the sole guide as to how to move forward. If we want to win more economic and democratic rights for working people, minorities, women, young people, etc., it is self defeating to use this tax compromise difference to 'break' with Obama. (I have to add that there are some voices who advocate a 'break' that were never 'with' the coalition to elect Obama in the first place.)
The stakes for our country and world are too high for any break -- or left/progressive go it alone -- tactics. Theories that promote 'the worst things get, the better the opportunity for progressive change' are too simplistic and one dimensional. The problem is more complicated then that.
The economic crisis is deep, and millions of working people are suffering. The facts are that the Republicans policies deepened the crisis yet, they made the greatest gains in the last election.
The times we live in call for a strategy and tactics that will bring victories; victories that can be built on...
Everybody understands that running an election and running a country are different. It is my view that the Obama administration policies and legislative victories have helped tens of millions of working families -- perhaps more then any president in living memory -- considering the short time and the challenges he faced in office. Much more needs to be done but this struggle is a marathon not a sprint.
Communists say that even though we are not in agreement with the president on many basic issues, he implemented many of his campaign promises. Progressive researchers who track that sort of thing give him pretty good marks.
A significant problem that the president and others had to grapple with was while the Democrats had a majority in both houses of Congress, they did not have a big enough majority in the Senate to stop the filibuster. And on many questions Democratic members of Congress were not united enough to win. It was a fragile coalition to say the least.
The first woman speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, and the progressive Democratic leadership did a heroic job from 2006-2010. They passed 290 pieces of legislation in the House that the U.S. Senate never acted on, everything from a clean energy bill to the DREAM Act.
The right-wing opposition to these bills and Obama policies have been unrelenting, unprincipled, well financed and well organized.In the last section, Tyner reveals just how the Communist Party plans to help Obama with some pressure from below - a major nationwide campaign for government 'jobs creation.'
In my time, I have never seen a sitting president subjected to such an unrelenting, personal attacks. The level of racism and red-baiting, including violent threats, has been unprecedented.
What does it achieve when some on the left join in with the right wing, proclaiming Obama a liar who had deceived the voters; and worst of all that he was no different than Bush.
Tell that to all those workers who were able to put food on the table and keep their jobs and homes because of legislation proposed and passed by Obama and the Democrats in the Congress.
If it were the case -- i.e. Obama is Bush, etc. -- how do we explain those right-wing billionaires who finance so-called tea party and other anti-Obama movements. To these Bush supporters, Obama was the devil incarnate.
Some on the left saw any compromise with the right as 'being too soft' rather then what was often a reflection of the real balance of power between the more lock step Republicans and divided Democrats.
I think Obama could have fought harder on many instances, but I also think when the racism was pouring down like acid rain polluting the atmosphere, and staining the political and moral fabric of the nation, the left was amazingly unresponsive. Too many times I heard people say it was Obama's fault for not fighting back. But the movement could have fought back. Blaming Obama makes it seem that the attacks are acceptable. Is that a principled position? For me, it's a form of capitulation to the extreme right and racism.
It's important to note, if the results had been more positive on November 2, the movement would be discussing taking the political offensive to help working people survive this horrible crisis by creating new, green jobs, ending the wars and attacks on immigrants.
The right-wing racist attack did more than mobilize their base, it also demoralized and demobilized Democratic voters. Some Democratic and progressive voters went from a messianic view of Obama to demonizing him. Neither are the right assessments to make.
For progressives, adopting an anti-Obama strategy is totally self-defeating. How do we distinguish ourselves from Sen. Mitch McConnell's and the Republicans' main goal of bringing down Obama?
2012 has to be part of any strategic and tactical thinking after these midterm elections. The next president will either be Obama or some right wing Republican. That's the reality for now. If the Republicans take control of all three branches of government -- again -- that will put the great majority of people on the defensive in the fight for economic and democratic rights. To not see that is a gross miscalculation of the right danger.
I think the most explosive issue is jobs and related economic crises -- like evictions -- facing working people. This will not be a easy time for the broad left/center coalition that brought the victory in 2006 and 2008.
One thing is clear to me, this fight cannot be won by making Obama the enemy. Those who are looking for a third party candidate on the left certainly have a right to do that, but it's not the path to victory at this stage.
The path to victory is in the critical fight for jobs and related issues. It's clear that the crisis of massive joblessness is not going to be solved in the halls of Congress and the White House alone. We need a united visible movement of the jobless to make it happen.
There needs to be a two year offensive for jobs through public works. In every city, state and town across the country we need to raise the demand.
Martin Luther King holiday weekend is an ideal occasion to kick off what should be a two year campaign all across the country.
King struggled for peace, jobs and freedom. The issue of jobs is not just an economic issue but a moral one, too. It can be linked to other issues including child welfare, poverty, immigrant rights, education, racial and gender equality, military spending and housing crisis.
Such a broad, grassroots movement will give real momentum to and build muti-racial unity for the 2012 elections. Franklin Roosevelt needed social movements to deliver the New Deal, and today, so does Obama.
