Elizabeth Warren on anti-woman issues raised by Republicans

If I still lived in Massachusetts, I would be voting for Elizabeth Warren. I wouldn’t have voted for Scott Brown in the first place, because I’m not foolish enough to believe any of the campaign promises made by Republicans. Even so-called moderates.

I raise my questions about Democrats to Democrats; but, this is a question simply that addresses all women, all Americans. The Party-formerly-known-as-Republican has chosen to bring back questions resolved in the 20th Century to satisfy the 19th Century ideology they now serve. I cannot support politics whose only direction is backwards.

‘Buffett Rule’ debate blocked by Senate Republicans

Republican mice on their way to stop another fair tax bill

Senate Republicans on Monday blocked a move to open debate on the so-called Buffett Rule, ensuring that a measure pressed for months by President Obama and Senate Democrats to ensure that the superrich pay a tax rate of at least 30 percent will not come to a decisive vote.

But the fierce debate preceding the 51-45 vote — the Democrats were nine votes short of the 60 they needed — set off a week of political wrangling over taxes that both parties insist they are already winning.

Senate Democrats intend to return repeatedly to the legislation, named after the billionaire investor Warren Buffett, who has complained that he pays a lower effective tax rate than his secretary. On Thursday, House Republicans will counter with a proposed tax cut for businesses that they say would spur job creation but would cost the Treasury almost exactly what the Democrats’ tax increase would raise…

Republicans are not only incompetent at economics, they’re lousy liars, as well.

…Pointing to a Gallup poll from last week that indicated 60 percent of Americans supported the proposal, including 63 percent of political independents, Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, called the Republican response “proof positive” that “for first time in decades, maybe generations, they’re on the defensive on their signature issue,” taxes.

After he made that comment, a CNN poll was released putting support at 72 percent, including 53 percent of Republicans.

With taxes due on Tuesday, a Washington debate on the tax code this week was inevitable, but the escalating attacks reflect the peculiarities of this election year. Democrats have known for weeks that the Buffett Rule would not win the 60 votes needed to break a Republican filibuster, but they pressed forward in part to try to make the Republicans’ likely presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, the face of economic “unfairness…”

In the Senate, all the Republicans but Senator Susan Collins of Maine voted against allowing debate on the Buffett Rule. Every Democrat but Senator Mark Pryor of Arkansas voted to allow it. Four senators did not vote…

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee immediately went after the two most vulnerable Senate Republicans running for re-election this year, Scott P. Brown of Massachusetts and Dean Heller of Nevada, accusing them of standing by billionaires while their party tries to cut Medicare. And they vowed the measure would continue to come up this year.

In general, the biggest corporations simply give similar amounts of money to both parties, hedging their bets and betting on greed. Not a bad tactic – except in an election year when working people are hurting the most.

The numbers came out this week on the average level of profits for various industries. The Pharmaceutical crew came out on top – and gee whiz – right after the Republicans worked so hard to gut the healthcare bill. Investment banks and financiers are right back up top, as well. Think the Republicans will get serious about the cost of running the nation – when they’re beholden to the cost of running corporate Ameria.

Teabagger’s favorite hustles their money with made-up rivalry

Scott Brown sent out a fantastical email to his supporters…claiming that “the Massachusetts political machine,” a homogeneous entity, is recruiting Rachel Maddow to run against him.

According to The Daily Beast, Brown’s “evidence appears to rest on a message sent out by Massachusetts Democratic Party Chairman John Walsh on Twitter the same day a Facebook page supporting a Maddow bid went live. ‘Some are talking about you running vs. Scott Brown in ‘12,’ Walsh tweeted, and the Boston blog Universal Hub suggested the message could have been meant for Maddow.”

It was this Tweet that engendered Brown’s ill-timed money-grubbing phantasmagoria. “Some like Rachel Maddow. I’m sure she’s a nice person—I just don’t think America can afford her liberal politics,” he wrote in the offending email.

Except, of course, Rachel Maddow has no plans to replace Scott Brown as replacement Ted Kennedy.

The Scott Brown fundraising letter is at the bottom of this article.

She finally ended up taking out a full-page advert (.pdf) in the Boston GLOBE pointing out what a silly hustle this was by Brown – since she never entertained anything to do with running for office.

I admit I can’t wait to see how much money Brown’s gullible supporters kick-in for a non-campaign.