Posted on 09/09/2011 11:05:58 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
http://sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=60fabf80-2e08-4b5e-a75f-a2ab9489246d
Bernie Sanders has linked Lofgren’s piece with this lead-in:
Sept 6, 2011
A Republican Reconsiders Raising taxes on the wealthy will kill small business’ ability to hire; that is the GOP dirge every time Bernie Sanders ... offers an amendment to increase taxes on incomes above $1 million. But the number of small businesses that have a net annual income over a million dollars is de minimis,” former Senate Budget Committee staffer Mike Lofgren wrote for TruthOut. LINK
There’s a Cong Zoe Lofgren (D-Csli).
One example comment on this Lofgren piece on another site (these people hate conservatives and are furious with Obama)
Anonymous says:
September 4, 2011 at 7:18 pm
I’m sure that for people like Mark and Keith, who have contractually guaranteed long-term employment and salaries which place them well within the top 10% of income earners, the prospect of a President Perry is, indeed, truly frightening. Perry, his fellow travelers in the Republican Party and the people who support them have no respect for the one thing, superior intellect, which afford Messrs. professors their social and economic standing. It makes sense for Mark and Keith to defend the status quo. They are prospering within it.
Of course there are significant differences between what the Democratic and Republican Parties have to offer. What isn’t discussed so much here are the similarities the two dominant parties share and how these similarities affect the everyday lives of people less fortunate than Mark and Keith more than do the differences.
The most obvious point of affinity between teams red and blue is foreign policy. Despite quibbling over details, all is right in the Washington DC halls of power as long as the military is being used actively to secure access to resources and markets, somewhere, anywhere. So much the better that there is little accounting of the true costs of our imperial adventuring. Vast amounts of resources are misallocated and unimaginably large numbers of innocent people are killed, maimed and/or displaced. But, hey: USA! USA! We’re Number One! This won’t be changing anytime soon so there’s nothing to be gained electorally in the United States by harping on it. Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are bi-partisan proof of this.
Another obvious similarity, one that could be germane to the 2012 election if the Democrats had any brains, is economic policy and how it has evolved over the last thirty years to the detriment of the middle and lower classes. Look at this graph of the percentage of jobs lost relative to peak employment tracked over time for each post-WWII recession. The similarity of the lengths and slopes of the 2001 and 2007 lines tells you all you need to know about priorities among the ruling class, Democrat and Republican alike.
There are any number of policies Obama could propose Thursday night in addressing the unemployment calamity that would fire up discouraged liberals. Sincere populist rhetoric followed by concrete legislation would bring a lot of disaffected voters back into his fold (here are three proposals, for example). Sure, the boldest proposals would never pass congress, but then nothing the president actually does propose will likely be acted on. Nevertheless, the process would began the long, slow task of moving the political center back towards the left. That the president will offer only weak tea initiatives (pun intended) that will do little to improve economic conditions tells you all you need to know about Obama’s comfort with the center continuing to drift rightwards. As Brett notes above, the president does not share many convictions with the Left.
A more dramatic picture of the long-term effects of ruling class priorities can be seen here. What does it matter to people in the bottom 80% of the income distribution whether we’re being screwed by President Obama or President Perry? Despite personal effort and contribution to rising rates of productivity, collective income will continue to either remain flat or decline based on individual circumstance. The deck is stacked regardless of which party is doing the shuffling. What kind of future is that?
Too bad for Mark and Keith if they are made worse off should the Democrats lose next year. For way too many in this country it doesn’t matter who wins. (For proof of this, just look at voter participation rates.) Economically, we’re screwed either way. Not having any disposable income to donate, the only power I have short of taking to the streets is to withhold my vote and convince as many people as I can to do the same. The moment I signal an intention to support the Democrats is the moment they stop caring what I think (not that they care much now). If enough people do likewise the Democrats will either change for the better or go the way of the Whigs.
Is this guy gay?
Maybe it is his sister? She was born in 47, her maiden is Lofgren and her husband is John Marshall Collins.
I did run across this page, I found it interesting.
http://prorev.com/family.htm
Love the way the same Progressive Fascists who tell us they can reduce smoking by raising taxes on Tobacco want to turn right around and tell us raising taxes on small business “has no economic impact”
The Tea Party is not a "party" in the political sense but a movement comprised of diverse individuals who share a common understanding: the Ruling Class of both parties now routinely urinates upon their backs (figuratively speaking) while insisting that it is raining - and that it is their fault, besides.
The American Left knows that such a movement threatens their goals far more so than those of the Right (as liberals truly believe in Leviathan government, while the GOP only fool themselves that they can employ it to better effect). That is why establishment Republican types pay lip service to the Tea Party (distancing themselves both subtly and cautiously via disclaimer), while Democrats treat them like the Plague, the contagious carriers of which they gleefully identify as GOP partisans, when frequently they are nothing of the kind.
Hmmmm ..?? Sounds like a “union” whiner to me.
Box of kleenix ..?? Anyone ..??
I think the GOP should spread the word regarding the TRUMKA UNION GOONS taking security guards HOSTAGE!!
These are not the kind of workers I want my tax dollars supporting.
Straying slightly, Bachmann staffer stories...
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29141.html
*snip*
“A conservative Republican House member, speaking on the condition of anonymity, suggested that Bachmann’s views — and her willingness to state them — make it hard for her to keep staff.
“When your captain’s crazy, it’s time to find a new ship,” the lawmaker said.”
/snip
_____________________________
They really do need to be more careful about staffers and brother—there’s some real chicken chit, back-biting, congress critters up there! Anonymity...gutless wonder!
He think’s wanting to compel spending cuts when we have unprecedented peacetime spending levels is extreme. So he’s an imbecile.
So glad to see your leaving, frankly people like you are the problem,
Good Riddance.
Don't let the door hit you in the as* on the way out.
Yours,
Leto.
“Who is Lofgren? I googled him, and he was a staffer, but no info on who he worked for. “
If anybody cares, he was a defense analyst for Kasich from 83 to 95. Went to the House budget office from 95 - 04. Then moved to the Senate budget office in 2005. I got this by searching around and finally stubling on “mike_lofgren budget.senate.gov”. I’m guessing nobody else would hire him after the 2010 elections so, this is his snarky way to get even.
The only time I could ever find him mentioned in the news was in one story about when Kasich changed fis mind about funding for the V-22 Osprey back in the early 90’s.
Also, No relation to Zoe. He was born in Akron Oh in 53. Grad of Akron U in 77 with a degree in History.
Thank you!
Great work.
Boo-frickin whoo.
I can't post this whole thing because of that fair use stuff on the front page, but here's a little thing I got from Lexis:
September 14, 1989, Thursday, Final Edition
Congress' plan to alter contract rule criticized
BYLINE: John Purnell; THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Dozens of private companies doing more than $4 billion worth of business with the Defense Department could lose their contracts under a proposal pending in Congress, contract proponents say.
The measure, contained in the $288.2 billion military spending bill for 1990, "would seriously degrade the capability to contract out and save taxpayer money," Rep. John R. Kasich, Ohio Republican, said through spokesman Mike Lofgren.
Emphasis emphatically added.
Gee, it is painful to think this turncoat, Lofgren, worked for Kasich.
I wonder if any of the local pundits in Ohio will ask Kaisch about it.
Dave Nalle’s post provides a very good view of what is really going on in Washington DC. We here in DC can tolerate either party as they have been. What we cannot abide are those who want to cut back the role of the federal government in pork-rolling and telling everyone what to do.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.