In an exclusive interview, Capt. Sullenberger goes in depth on the FAA bill amendment, introduced by Rep. Bill Shuster (R-PA), that he says will cost lives. This veteran pilot and accident investigator says:
“This amendment is really a slap in the face of the families of the victims of the Buffalo crash”
He’s talking about the crash that claimed the lives of 50 people in Buffalo, NY. It is believed pilot fatigue played a role in the crash.
Safety regulations, like making sure pilots are properly rested to ensure passenger safety would be severely impacted by this new provision.
It’s not even just a safety issue. It’s also labor issue, and sadly, when Ed asked, “Is this a money issue?”
Capt. Sullenberger said simply: “Of course.”
See the full interview here:
Update: Join us again on Monday—we’ll be honoring the anniversary of the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. and his commitment to workers’ rights.
King died in Memphis where he was supporting the right to collectively bargain for sanitation workers there.
Leave a Comment:
The consumate professional in american craftsmanship speaks. His words should carry all the weight that sat on his shoulders on that fateful january day. This gentleman knows first hand that his labor union has taught the professionality , the care, and the hands on training that ,on his definitive day, carried his own greatest moment to national pride. He has left us with a gratitude that this nation can only hope , one day, to repay.
What the republicans do not realize is that all the transportation industries are already cut to the bone. They do not know what they are asking. White collar republicans should stay away from technical and blue collar things they know nothing about. The bean counters have been cutting and cutting for many years, while all the CEO's get lavish bonuses. Look at American Aitlines. They have the best technical staff. Other airlines have all there major repairs and rebuilds done for them by the technical staff of American Airlines,yet year after year they cut and cut and give big money to there CEO';s. John The Union Guy
hot news for ed and rachael, per the democratic office in lacrosse wisconsin, they have enough signatures now to recall republican senator dan kapanke and will be filing them with the state today! this is no.2 as senator randy hoppers will be filed next week.
Great job on focuing on the unions and why they matter.
well let me say this. we once had a person in the employment a federal government agency that lived as a statesperson in africa who used to connect with ,and collect information from arab and african people who once represented factions that served our interests. One day the white house decided that it would serve their political needs to out this clandestine agent and cause great damage to ,not only the person , but the agency for which he/she worked. In fact this white house admin had destroyed the integrity of the entire intelligence community for generations to come. tell me would you take a job with the cia if you knew that some idiot fom texas could destroy your career and almost certainly have every person you ever shook hands with investigated, and possibly toutured. yeah the damage is long lived. Is it any wonder that the efforts to remove the lybian regime is going slowly.
Very well spoken captain.
and thank you for standing up and being a great voice.
As a private pilot myself, you are what young pilots should look up to.
"Great job focusing on the unions and why they matter"? It's amazing how many of you focus on the 1% of this discussion - unions. The true focus was on a proposed amendment that would impact the FAA and the airline industry regarding safety regulations and inspections. As a private pilot, I share Sulley's concerns with this amendment. Should the budget of the FAA be reduced some measure along with several other federal agencies to support a federal budget that helps address our rising national debt? Yes, but not at the expense of pilot and passenger safety.
Is it surprising to find out that Republicans do not give a damn about human life? People aren't money.
Would that be the human life of the unborn? Would that be the human life of the black community during the '50s and 60s? Would that be the human life of women and their rights? That's right, people arent' money. You do know the history and platform of the Democratic Party, right? I'll be happy to educate you on these matters since I'm sure you don't want to appear to be a hypocrite. And one Republican congressman, especially one that is not in a leadership position, doesn't speak for entire party or population of citizens.
here is some education Mike-22030
Read up on the grand old Republican Man of the KKK Gov. DC Stephenson of Indiana...history that was obviously not in your textbook. This fine Gentleman kidnaped, raped, beat and BIT a young school teacher who rebuffed him...until said Woman poisoned herself and died two weeks later, but not until signing a witnessed statement to the events that lead to her death. Gov. Stephenson was outraged that anyone thought this sick deed bad of him ,so he turned on all the other hood hidden Republicans in Indiana by opening up his little Black Box and caused the removal of many Republican politician of the time.
When you finally get what you want, the removal of all Unions, you will get what you deserve....Corporations that give you that low paying job...but will they care if you are sick from the pollution that is no longer illegal? Gee, maybe even your kids can get one of those low paying jobs instead of going to school. why bother with all that book learning!
If you cannot sit a a table and bargain for your working conditions do you really think they are going to give you the good life out of generosity? What the Union busting is about is making the US worker into the worker in China where worker suicide rates are as many as 11 a week in many high tech plants.
Enjoy
Enjoy your education:
The Republican Party was formed in the 1850’s specifically to oppose Democratic pro-slavery policies.
Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves as the 16th Republican president. He was murdered by a Democrat.
In 1868 not 1 Democrat voted for the 14th Amendment to the Constitution (granting former slaves citizenship). The bill was passed by Republicans
The Ku Klux Klan was formed by Democratic southerners in the 1870’s specifically to stop Republicans and African Americans from voting.
On April 20, 1871 Republican Congress enacted the Ku Klux Klan Act, outlawing Democratic Party-affiliated terrorist groups which oppressed African-Americans
March 1, 1875 Civil Rights Act of 1875, guaranteeing access to public accommodations without regard to race, signed by Republican President U.S. Grant; passed with 92% Republican support over 100% Democrat opposition
July 14, 1884 Republicans criticize Democratic Party’s nomination of racist U.S. Senator Thomas Hendricks (D-IN) for vice president; he had voted against the 13th Amendment banning slavery
August 30, 1890 Republican President Benjamin Harrison signs legislation by U.S. Senator Justin Morrill (R-VT) making African-Americans eligible for land-grant colleges in the South
February 8, 1894 Democrat Congress and Democrat President Grover Cleveland join to repeal Republicans’ Enforcement Act, which had enabled African-Americans to vote
April 18, 1920 Minnesota’s FIRST-in-the-nation anti-lynching law, promoted by African-American Republican Nellie Francis, signed by Republican Gov. Jacob Preus
May 17, 1954 Chief Justice Earl Warren, three-term Republican Governor (CA) and Republican vice presidential nominee in 1948, wins unanimous support of Supreme Court for school desegregation in Brown v. Board of Education
November 25, 1955 Eisenhower administration bans racial segregation of interstate bus travel
March 12, 1956 Ninety-seven Democrats in Congress condemn Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education, and pledge to continue segregation
June 5, 1956 Republican federal judge Frank Johnson rules in favor of Rosa Parks in decision striking down “blacks in the back of the bus” law
October 19, 1956 On campaign trail, Vice President Richard Nixon vows: "American boys and girls shall sit, side by side, at any school – public or private – with no regard paid to the color of their skin. Segregation, discrimination, and prejudice have no place in America"
November 6, 1956 African-American civil rights leaders Martin Luther King and Ralph Abernathy vote for Republican Dwight Eisenhower for President
September 9, 1957 President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republican Party’s 1957 Civil Rights Act
September 24, 1957 Sparking criticism from Democrats such as Senators John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, President Dwight Eisenhower deploys the 82nd Airborne Division to Little Rock, AR to force Democrat Governor Orval Faubus to integrate public schools
June 23, 1958 President Dwight Eisenhower meets with Martin Luther King and other African-American leaders to discuss plans to advance civil rights
February 4, 1959 President Eisenhower informs Republican leaders of his plan to introduce 1960 Civil Rights Act, despite staunch opposition from many Democrats
May 6, 1960 President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republicans’ Civil Rights Act of 1960, overcoming 125-hour, around-the-clock filibuster by 18 Senate Democrats
May 2, 1963 Republicans condemn Democrat sheriff of Birmingham, AL for arresting over 2,000 African-American schoolchildren marching for their civil rights
June 1, 1963 Democrat Governor George Wallace announces defiance of court order issued by Republican federal judge Frank Johnson to integrate University of Alabama
September 29, 1963 Gov. George Wallace (D-AL) defies order by U.S. District Judge Frank Johnson, appointed by President Dwight Eisenhower, to integrate Tuskegee High School
June 9, 1964 Republicans condemn 14-hour filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act by U.S. Senator and former Ku Klux Klansman Robert Byrd (D-WV), who still serves in the Senate
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was introduced and approved by a staggering majority of Republicans in the Senate. The Act was opposed by most southern Democrat senators, several of whom were proud segregationists—one of them being Al Gore Sr. Democrat
President Lyndon B. Johnson relied on Illinois Senator Everett Dirkson, the Republican leader from Illinois, to get the Act passed.
June 20, 1964 The Chicago Defender, renowned African-American newspaper, praises Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) for leading passage of 1964 Civil Rights Act
March 7, 1965 Police under the command of Democrat Governor George Wallace attack African-Americans demonstrating for voting rights in Selma, AL
March 21, 1965 Republican federal judge Frank Johnson authorizes Martin Luther King’s protest march from Selma to Montgomery, overruling Democrat Governor George Wallace
August 4, 1965 Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) overcomes Democrat attempts to block 1965 Voting Rights Act; 94% of Senate Republicans vote for landmark civil right legislation, while 27% of Democrats oppose
August 6, 1965 Voting Rights Act of 1965, abolishing literacy tests and other measures devised by Democrats to prevent African-Americans from voting, signed into law; higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats vote in favor
FZZZTT: I don't usually say this, but you're not too bright. D. C. Stephenson was NOT a Republican, he was a Democrat, LOL!! Good job Einstein. LOL!!
David Curtiss "Steve" Stephenson was an American Grand Dragon (state leader) of the Ku Klux Klan in the U.S. state of Indiana and 22 other Northern states. He is considered to have been one of the most successful Klan leaders up until his downfall after his conviction for murder. His trial and imprisonment contributed to the end of the second wave of Klan activity in the 1920s.
Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan Stephenson was born in Houston, Texas, and moved with his family to Maysville, Oklahoma, where he worked as a printer's apprentice and was active in the Socialist Party. In 1920, he moved to Irvington, Indiana, where he became a salesman and joined the Democratic Party and the Ku Klux Klan. In that same year, he ran unsuccessfully for a Democratic Congressional nomination.
This Democrat low life then changed his affiliation from the Democratic to the Republican Party (1923). Now where have we seen these types of low lifes before that changed from one party to another - opportunistic scum. Is that the best you can do? I give you a legacy of Democratic racism, and you give me a single loser from 1923 that started out as a Socialist and Democrat while in the KKK.
Can you come up with a date after 1965 the republicans did anything good? At least until recently when extremists took over your party we could have a good exchange of ideas.
While social justice may never have been his intention, many blacks remembered FDR with warmth because they benefited from his works projects and he funded writers to get their side of the history that they had lived through from slavery and afterwards. After my first wife's grandfather had died we found his paperwork from a camp where he worked during that time. Many became democrats for just that reason.
What sealed the racial identity of the parties, even now, was the Kennedy/LBJ Administrations. It was the Johnson Administration who made the Civil Rights Act law, and then followed it up with the War on Poverty and the Great Society initiatives which helped make our educational system the best in the world...even in communities where whites fled to the suburbs as a protest against school desegregation. The racist democrats, dixiecrats, of the south fled the party in disgust and became republicans. Thus despite the vaunted support that Nixon gave black Americans, he was able to pioneer the use of the Southern Strategy which worked so well for Reagan.
Unfortunately, LBJ's legacy of further and further entrenchment in the Viet Nam War wrecked the economy which racists and conservatives were able to blame on his social justice programs, and which paved the way for the Reagan Administration.
I will tell you this: if Eisenhower was typical of conservatives and republican presidential candidates today, I would have absolutely no problem with them. I might even be less certain as to which party I should belong to. But instead today's conservatives are of the sort and are represented by the Birchers who called Eisnhower a dirty pinko commie. That makes MY choice crystal clear.
So you turned your back on the Republican party that fought for equal rights, liberties, freedoms and justice for the black community for the for the last two centuries, and why? Social justice? What, legal justice, according to our Constitution was no longer good enough for you? You "had" to go for the 'entitlement programs" that enslave you to the federal government? Weak.
You're wrong again about the Kennedy/LBJ adminsitrations and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 too. This is a quote from Kennedy's Library, "President Kennedy believed the grass roots movement for civil rights would anger many Southern whites and make it more difficult to pass civil rights laws in Congress, which was dominated by conservative Southern Democrats, and he distanced himself from it". You also didn't mention the 18 southern Democratic Senators that launched a filibuster to prevent its passage.
Damn, don't you read history books? LBJ signed the Act into law AFTER JFK was assassinated to "honor" his memory, which was BS. What fiction do you read to think racist Democrats and Dixiecrats, of the south fled the party in disgust and became Republicans. Seriously? You turned your back on Nixon too that got us out of Vietnam and supported the black community? Progressives and their "social justice" is anti-Republic and anti-Constitution.
Republicans never left the black community. The Democrats just figured you out: use 'social justice' to spread the wealth and provide you entitlements. Like a Drug Dealer and an Addict. You should be proud. Think about this history the next time you call a Republican a racist, and the kind of future you would have had without them.
Tom: Tell me what "extremist" anti-black community laws were advanced by either Reagan or Bush. Lets have that "exchange of ideas". If you're going to put that out there.. back it up.
With the shuttering of factories in cities, which had already been deserted by white for suburbs to prevent their children from going to school with black kids, black families found themselves relying more and more on public assistance. Reagan rolled back public assistance with lurid tales of Welfare Queens. Poverty, real poverty worse than anything felt during the Great Depression began to spread in the shadow of factories which had been closed as jobs were shipped over-seas. Just in time for a new and inexpensive form of cocaine to appear. Crack. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB2/nsaebb2.htm Whether or not markets were opened up for Reagan's Central American cocaine producing...friends? allies? the effect on the inner city was devastating. Crack babies, crack heads crack whores, open war-fare in American cities by drug gangs. Just like mainstreet Mexico now. And for the same reasons.
Enter the WAR ON DRUGS. Mandatory minimum sentences with vast disparities between crack and powder cocaine. No that couldn't be racially motivated at all could it? And its not that Reagan was anti-black necessarily. He just hated poor people. His argument against public education was why spend money on people who are going to just wind up in prison anyway...justifying the roll back of the Great Society educational initiatives. Of course all this is well known. Shredded the social safety net, amped up the arms race until the Soviet Union collapsed. Sat on his hands while HIV/AIDS was considered a gay man's disease (ha! good one!) Gave tax cuts, said trees caused pollution, "acid rain" was introduced into the lexicon, he crashed the stock market in '87, caused savings and loans to be bailed out while people retired to eat cat food and claimed that many people "choose" to be homeless...and insane.
Really it all sounds like a dress rehearsal for Bush/Cheney, doesn't it?
Unfortunately, there are very poor black and white people in our nation, and drugs are not forced upon anyone; people "choose" to make a life of crime selling and taking them vs. pursuing honest work for them and their family.
Every citizen, regardless of race, can choose to find work or leave the inner city and move to find an oppportunity for a new life for them and their family. People make those hard decisions everyday. How do you think poor black and whites make it to the middle class?
Democrats provide "hand outs" with their 'social justice', which only makes those citizens in poverty; a little more comfortable to keep them there. It doesn't help them move up as Republicans try to do for them.
Many in the low income community are enticed by the "free" government hand-outs without realizing there are strings attached. Enter 'community organizing' to vote for a particular party. It's about power and control. How many times did you hear "Where is my Obama Money?" as if he has a 'stash' of cash.
It's ironic, that as a people, you fought to end one type of slavery and then willingly walk into another form of slavery with the federal government and the Progressives. What did Jimmy Carter do to improve your situation?
How did Carter fight HIV/AIDS and Drugs. Carter drove our economy into the ground which led to the factories shutting down in the inner cities and creating the inner city crisis you speak of, which Reagan had to contend with as President. How did Carter improve education? or International relations?
Reagan had to deal with a budget that forced cuts across all programs to include the Department of Education. He didn't hate poor people. He had to make difficult decisions that impact all Americans just as we have to today. Don't believe everything you read in the New York Times. There are two sides to every story. He may not have been perfect (who is?) but he supported a strong Constitutional Republic and defeated the Communists. Good for America.
We have to look at the 'big picture' when electing and supporting a President. It's irresponsible to vote for a President because of a stance he takes on one or two issues. Once people pull their blinders off, they will see this President is doing more harm to the lower and middle class than good.
Lets look at Obama, Biden, Pelosi and Reed over the past two years (and the majority the Democrats maintained in Congress the 6 years before that under Bush. What legislation has the Democrats advanced over the past 8 years to help create jobs vs. extended 'unemployment benefits'?
Which one keeps low income families near poverty and 'comfortable' vs. creating opportunities for them to advance themselves from the lower to middle classes of our society? The goal of Progressives is control and power over its citizens with a strong central government - like we see across Europe (Socialism).
In order to gain more power and transform America, Progressives need the people to riot and demonstrate; calling for transformation through 'social justice', which is a trick to gain and maintain power and continue their anti-Republic change and transformation. They call for "class warfare".
Rather than 'demonize' small businesses and corporate America (and I agree, some rules need to be introduced to provide some measure of government oversight), why not demonstrate against the Progressives that work to constrain 'job creation' in the private sector for the middle class?
Pelosi said, "unemployment benefits is the best way to stimulate our economy." Do you believe that? Why didn't Pelosi push for job creating legislation as the Obama administration allowed unemployment to climb to over 9%? He surrounded himself with advisors that never created a job.
The black middle class expanding under Republican leadership for a reason, which is why we are seeing more of them speak out in favor of the Tea Party and Conservative movement. Republicans are not against social programs. In fact, they advocate for many of them along with business.
It's time to take a critical look at what "this" administration is doing and not doing for the lower and middle class populations in our Republic - beyond the Progressive goal of obtaining votes and power with entitlements. At some point, people need to move from the 'gravy train' to the job lines.
America is about hard work based on individual liberties, rights and freedoms. None of this 'collective' BS we hear from the Progressives. If you have a daugher that is getting As in school based on hard work, and another kid that skips classes and causes trouble gets a D. The Progressives would take your daughters A grades (dropping her to a C+) and give some points to the D student to bring him up the ladder. That is social justice.
In the inner cities, honest work left when the the factories closed and the jobs were shipped overseas. And it was factory work that brought them there in the first place, as an alternative to share cropping in the agrarian South after the Civil War. Just like I already said. First the factories closed after the jobs were sent overseas. The public assistance was cut of in Reagan's War against Welfare Queens.
http://www.anitra.net/homelessness/columns/anitra/eightmyths.html
It is a simple fact of human nature. People do not allow themselves to starve. If there are no legitimate means to support themselves, illegitimate means will work just fine. Drugs sex violence and other people's property are the commerce of last resort. Fortuitious that crack came along when it did, allowing young blacks to become millionaires without requiring college degrees and only at the cheap cost of living their lives either in dog years or growing old in prison, if at all.
1. How? Do you have enough money to just pick up and move? Where would you go? What would you do? What if you are black, have no education, no prospects and don't know anyone outside of your neighborhood? Are you saying they do the Grapes of Wrath thing become, migrant farmers? You remember that the Joads were WHITE don't you? And even if they are educated and have prospects, just the color of their skin is a threat to property values. Maybe you just LOVE your black neighbors. Most white folks don't. They mutter under their breath about "there goes the neighborhood!" Low Crime is a cute euphanism for All White, even today.
2. The middle class has been melting like a snow man in July since Reagan. The middle class use to be the Greatest Generation and the Baby Boomers who had benefited from the WW2 expansion of the unionized manufacturing sector. You worked a factory job, had job security, benefits and a pension and could send the kids to college who would form the professional middle class. After Reagan the reality of corporate downsizing to maximize the bottom line after production had been sent to oversea facilities became the new normal.
Anymore, they simply don't. Bush created 1/20th the jobs that Clinton did and education required for entry into the professional middle classes are becoming price out of reach for anyone who doesn't already have money. There is a Recession going on and unemployment hasn't been this high since the the Great depression. The public sector is the last bastion of the middle class as well as the last refuge of union membership...and that is precisely what is under attack now.
If Republican were interested in helping ANYONE move up, much less the underclasses, they would be bringing manufacturing jobs back home and re-opening factories. But, unfortunately, that is a bald-faced lie. They are entirely beholden to the people who enjoy the fat bottom line that slave labor abroad provides them and are rewarded with tax cuts despite the fact that the govt loses out of payroll taxes collected from factory workers abroad. That, incidently, is how the govt was able to make up its deficit investment in manufacturing during WW2. In effect, the govt is cutting the taxes for the very people who are costing the govt tax revenue - compounding the deficit. Brilliant!
In contrast, Republicans have been holding unemployment insurance hostage several times...a despicable practice pioneered by Jim Bunning and Tom Cobourn...and other practices that destroy the door that stands between the unemployed/underemployed/the poor and the wolves. It had been said that it is only two missed meals that stand between civilization and savage barbarism. By that measure Republicans are all for barbarism. They justify it as social Darwinism, saying that it is only fit that the string should survive.
It's ironic, that as a people, you fought to end one type of slavery and then willingly walk into another form of slavery with the federal government and the Progressives. What did Jimmy Carter do to improve your situation?
HIV/AIDS did not appear until 1981. Before then the most terrifying STD was herpes because it was incurable. I remember news reports about gay men trying to infect whole cities with herpes by pissing in their municipal water supply. Just how like is that do you think? Had HIV/AIDS happened on Carter's watch I doubt he would have just written it off as God's punishment on the queers as was the Reagan line at that time.
Crack didn't appear until '85, when Reagan had his projects going in Central America, funding the Contras (who were cocaine producers) and having the CIA form Death Squads in el Salvadore...which was suppose to be the M.O. for our involvement in Iraq. I'm guessing that had we no invilvement in Central America, cocaine would not have been flooding the streets of South Central LA and other places.
Just as I predicted. Right, it was Carter who destroyed the economy. It was the Great Society initatives of the Johnslon Administration. What I DON'T hear, is that the fact that we dropped more munitions on Viet Nam than had been dropped on all sides in Europe during WW2 had anything to do with it. Or do you believe, as Bush/Cheney did, that war is MAGICALLY stimulative to the economy? There was no correspending investment in the manufacturing base during Viet Nam or Bush's Wars that there was in WW2. And it is no secret that defense spending is what helped spawn those multi-trillion dollar deficits during the Reagan Administration, despite supplementing that spend with selling weapons to Iranians who held Americans hostage (who then used those weapons to destroy a marine barracks in Beirut...you must be so proud) and opening up markets in America for his Central American pal's cocaine. the effect of the Viet Nam war on the American economy was ,what? Negligible?
Reagan's personal hero was Andrew Jackson, who is on record as the greatest mass murderer our nation ever produced. Don't impute too much in the way of humanitarian instinct in this creep.
Because of the Great Society educational initiatives, America's educational system was the envy of the world. After 31 years of Reaganite influence in how we view education, we now dangle between 23rd and 27th in the world, well behind many 3rd world nations in math and science. There's your Reaganomic educational triumph!
As for whether or not Reagan was anti-black...gosh, maybe its because he appointed people who were hostile to it fill positions overseeing the Civil Rights Act, and that reverse discrimination was a popular talking point, as were the Law and Order/Tough on Crime platform when the scary person behind bars was always shown to be black. Gee, what do you think?
Fun as all this has been...I'll have to come back later and take apart your posts. I have a life outside from here.
You mean compared to the suspension of unemployment insurance championed by Bunnung Cobuorn and later embraced by the republican caucus? You mean all of the bills that weren't stopped dead in the Senate by minority abuse of the fillibuster?
Like tax cuts for the wealthy who don't create a single job? Like the coal, petroleum and gas industries who suck billions out of the tax payers teat, and have politicians apologize to them like Joe Barton did to BP, when they've killed Americans, destroyed ecologies and economies. Why do you hate Americans who aren't wealthy so much?
{{In the inner cities, honest work left when the the factories closed and the jobs were shipped overseas. And it was factory work that brought them there in the first place, as an alternative to share cropping in the agrarian South after the Civil War. Just like I already said. First the factories closed after the jobs were sent overseas. The public assistance was cut of in Reagan's War against Welfare Queens.}}
Factories are not the end of for jobs in America - its one of many sources for making an honest living. So, its a falacy to say that 'honest work' left when the factories closed in the inner cities. What about the rest of America - suburbs and rural areas? Both parties have been responsible for the shipping of American jobs overseas - both. If we use your logic, you would have us believe that only honest work is found in labor unions, which again is not true. Welfare corruption and abuse was rampant in the inner cities, as a form of 'social justice' under Democratic administrations. I applaud Reagan for attempting to reform "public assistance" with regards to Welfare Queens.
{{It is a simple fact of human nature. People do not allow themselves to starve. If there are no legitimate means to support themselves, illegitimate means will work just fine. Drugs sex violence and other people's property are the commerce of last resort. Fortuitious that crack came along when it did, allowing young blacks to become millionaires without requiring college degrees and only at the cheap cost of living their lives either in dog years or growing old in prison, if at all.}}
Again with the red herring argument, that there are "no legitimate means to support themselves" so people had to turn to crime so as not to starve. I came from a small town in upstate NY with no future and joined the military to escape and create a life for myself and get an education just as many lower middle class and middle class citizens do to create an opportunity for a better life. So, I'm not buying your excuse of: no factories = no honest work in the cities. It's a convenient excuse to avoid hard work and pursue easy 'illegal' money with the examples you provided. Why does this impact only blacks?
{{1. How? Do you have enough money to just pick up and move? Where would you go? What would you do? What if you are black, have no education, no prospects and don't know anyone outside of your neighborhood? Are you saying they do the Grapes of Wrath thing become, migrant farmers? You remember that the Joads were WHITE don't you? And even if they are educated and have prospects, just the color of their skin is a threat to property values. Maybe you just LOVE your black neighbors. Most white folks don't. They mutter under their breath about "there goes the neighborhood!" Low Crime is a cute euphanism for All White, even today.}}
I just gave you an example: join the military or find other work. Classified ads in the inner cities have jobs; just not the ones people 'want'. It's easy to be picky when you're receving a government welfare check or unemployment checks for several months - now two years. People became lazy looking for the next hand out because these "social justice" programs took away their will to apply themselves, work hard, make sacrifices and grow out of their poverty. There were poor white people working the farms and living in the cities too. Check state and federal crime records and tell me why minority groups commit the majority of crimes in the cities.
{{2. The middle class has been melting like a snow man in July since Reagan. The middle class use to be the Greatest Generation and the Baby Boomers who had benefited from the WW2 expansion of the unionized manufacturing sector. You worked a factory job, had job security, benefits and a pension and could send the kids to college who would form the professional middle class. After Reagan the reality of corporate downsizing to maximize the bottom line after production had been sent to oversea facilities became the new normal.}}
The middle class is not melting. In fact, we are seeing more members of the black community move up into the middle and upper middle classes since Reagan. I have family that work for the unions and can appreciate the job security, salary and benefits they receive. However, again - there are many more small businesses and corporations that don't have unions where the employees enjoy a better quality of life. The large labor unions have become corrupt with power and are actually hindering our economy. The cost of union labor is one of the reasons why American jobs have gone overseas. You have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. No where does it say a job. You have to make your own way in life. Americans do every day with and without unions. Why not become an entrepreneur? Create your own business?
{{Anymore, they simply don't. Bush created 1/20th the jobs that Clinton did and education required for entry into the professional middle classes are becoming price out of reach for anyone who doesn't already have money. There is a Recession going on and unemployment hasn't been this high since the the Great depression. The public sector is the last bastion of the middle class as well as the last refuge of union membership...and that is precisely what is under attack now.}}
Republicans and Democrats do not dictate the cost of tuition among our colleges and universities. Again, a red herring to support this falacy of Bush vs. Clinton and the cost of education. The private sector unions are NOT under attack - show me where they are. However, the collecting bargaining rules for PUBLIC sector unions that receive their salaries and benefits from the state, e.g., middle class tax payers are being 'reformed' to help localities deal with the cost of labor based on their limited budgets and resources, and keep them in line with the private sector. Middle Class does not equal Union when union workers receive much higher pay and much better benefits than the citizens they work for. You can thank the Republican Congress that helped balance the budget and bring about a surplus under Clinton.
{{If Republican were interested in helping ANYONE move up, much less the underclasses, they would be bringing manufacturing jobs back home and re-opening factories. But, unfortunately, that is a bald-faced lie. They are entirely beholden to the people who enjoy the fat bottom line that slave labor abroad provides them and are rewarded with tax cuts despite the fact that the govt loses out of payroll taxes collected from factory workers abroad. That, incidently, is how the govt was able to make up its deficit investment in manufacturing during WW2. In effect, the govt is cutting the taxes for the very people who are costing the govt tax revenue - compounding the deficit. Brilliant!}}
What has the Democrat controlled Congress (House and Senate) done for the past 8 years to pass legislation that would enable the return of jobs and re-open factories in America? Not much. Presidents don't write laws - they either sign or veto them. Where are the new jobs over the past 8 years based on the stimulus funds? Again, no progress and 9% unemployment. Do you see a trend here? Where is this "slave labor" you speak of in corporate America? You're missing the point of tax cuts and their impact on the economy. It's not just about reducing taxes on the rich, which pay the majority of federal taxes (revenue) for the government. It's about legislation that encourage businesses to expand and create jobs. The Democrats failed to pass a budget for the past 2 years now. Their bureaucratic regulations have stiffled businesses. Obamacare threw another wrench into business expansion and job growth because it added a large measure of 'uncertainty' and cost for doing business.
{{In contrast, Republicans have been holding unemployment insurance hostage several times...a despicable practice pioneered by Jim Bunning and Tom Cobourn...and other practices that destroy the door that stands between the unemployed/underemployed/the poor and the wolves. It had been said that it is only two missed meals that stand between civilization and savage barbarism. By that measure Republicans are all for barbarism. They justify it as social Darwinism, saying that it is only fit that the string should survive.}}
Americans should NOT receive unemployment insurance for 2 years. It's ridiculous. Wreckless spending led by the Democrats has ballooned our debt and deficit, which is causing inflation and increasing the price for goods and services, which hurts the most vulnerable among our nation - the poor. In America, we have 'winners and losers' - that's life. It's why America is the strongest nation in the world economically. Socialist nations in Europe that have large centralized governments tried "social justice" and found it made them weaker and broke their budgets, which we are seeing today in Greece, Italy, Spain, Ireland and elsewhere within the European Union. As Benjamin Franklin said, "Laziness travels so slowly that poverty soon overtakes him."
{{HIV/AIDS did not appear until 1981. Before then the most terrifying STD was herpes because it was incurable. I remember news reports about gay men trying to infect whole cities with herpes by pissing in their municipal water supply. Just how like is that do you think? Had HIV/AIDS happened on Carter's watch I doubt he would have just written it off as God's punishment on the queers as was the Reagan line at that time.}}
It's a known fact that Bush did much more than Clinton to combat HIV/AIDS in Africa and in America. You believe Jimmy Carter would have done more than Reagan. I guess we'll never know. If the Democrats were so concerned about this threat, why didn't Clinton take it on? If you want to get hung up on Reagan's "religious perspective" that's your perogative. The fact is HIV/AIDS was more prevalent in the gay community back in the '80s; which is not to say they were the cause of it. What has Obama done to combat HIV/AIDS in Africa and America? Nothing compared to Bush. So what's your point here?
{{Just as I predicted. Right, it was Carter who destroyed the economy. It was the Great Society initatives of the Johnslon Administration. What I DON'T hear, is that the fact that we dropped more munitions on Viet Nam than had been dropped on all sides in Europe during WW2 had anything to do with it. Or do you believe, as Bush/Cheney did, that war is MAGICALLY stimulative to the economy? There was no correspending investment in the manufacturing base during Viet Nam or Bush's Wars that there was in WW2. And it is no secret that defense spending is what helped spawn those multi-trillion dollar deficits during the Reagan Administration, despite supplementing that spend with selling weapons to Iranians who held Americans hostage (who then used those weapons to destroy a marine barracks in Beirut...you must be so proud) and opening up markets in America for his Central American pal's cocaine. the effect of the Viet Nam war on the American economy was ,what? Negligible?}}
It was a Democratic President that got us INTO Vietnam and a Republican that got us OUT of Vietnam. Just as it was a Democratic President that got us INTO Korea - not to mention the two world wars. The idea of a 'military industrial complex' during the time of Vietnam was during a Democratic administration. Afghanistan was not "Bush's War". It was America's War based on the attacks of 9/11. Perhaps you are a pacifist that felt we shouldn't strike back at Al Qaeda, but not the majority of Americans - both Democrats and Republicans - supported that war to include Obama. Iraq is debateable, just as we're seeing Obama commit America to operations in Libya. Obama ran on the platform that he would pull American troops out of both Afghanistan and Iraq within one year of his Presidency and close GITMO. Last I check we're still at war and GITMO is still active.
{{Reagan's personal hero was Andrew Jackson, who is on record as the greatest mass murderer our nation ever produced. Don't impute too much in the way of humanitarian instinct in this creep.Because of the Great Society educational initiatives, America's educational system was the envy of the world. After 31 years of Reaganite influence in how we view education, we now dangle between 23rd and 27th in the world, well behind many 3rd world nations in math and science. There's your Reaganomic educational triumph!}}
Andrew Jackson was a Democrat! A Democrat known on record as the greatest mass murderer our nation ever produced, not a Republican, just as we've seen Democrats were members of the KKK. So, lets stick to facts. You have Obama and members of his administration that declared they are communists, marxist socialists, and maoists; last I checked Stalin and Mao were some of the greatest mass murderers on record in the world.
{{As for whether or not Reagan was anti-black...gosh, maybe its because he appointed people who were hostile to it fill positions overseeing the Civil Rights Act, and that reverse discrimination was a popular talking point, as were the Law and Order/Tough on Crime platform when the scary person behind bars was always shown to be black. Gee, what do you think?}}
Reagan did nothing to repeal or hinder the Civil Rights Act during his administration. Americans should be thankful he was tough on crime regardless of the color of skin of the criminals that perpetrated those acts. Justice is blind and objective; Social Justice is subjective and goes against our Constitution and foundation upon which our Republic was founded. If you consider yourself a black man on par with whites, which you are - a fact that Republicans have fought for along side the black community for almost two centuries against Democrats, then you too would consider "affirmative action" as a measure that has passed its time and treats you as a 2nd class citizen. Also, don't you consider "Black History Month" a slap in the face? The great accomplishments made by the black community is part of America's history. Instead, the recognition is given on a month that has the least number of days in it. Progressives/Democrats use politically correct speech and 'special accomodations' for minorities as a means to control them and gain political power because they've become addicted to them as a 'drug'.
{{Fun as all this has been...I'll have to come back later and take apart your posts. I have a life outside from here.}}
I enjoy our debate and look forward to taking apart your posts as well. Have a good weekend.
Don Quixokie {{You mean compared to the suspension of unemployment insurance championed by Bunnung Cobuorn and later embraced by the republican caucus? You mean all of the bills that weren't stopped dead in the Senate by minority abuse of the fillibuster?}}
Minority abuse of the fillibuster? I can give you multiple examples of Democratic fillibuster abuse in the Congress. "Abuse" is in the eye of the beholder such as the "abuse" we saw from the Democratic senate minority in the Wisconsin state capital that walked out and left the state to try and get their way. I absolutely agree with Bunning and Coburn that held up the legislation because the Senate wasn't coming up to any way to pay for the benefit extension and make it deficit neutral. The amendments was defeated by only a 50-48 vote. You make it sound as if the unemployed weren't receiving any unemployment benefits when they were already receiving up to 26 weeks. Over a period of three years it went from 26 to 99 weeks. And you think this is a good thing? I don't. I suppose from a Democrat perspective, if you're going to tank the economy (again), why not expand the safety net for those suffering from your poor economic policies that led to the worsening and extension of the jobless crisis in the first place.
Don Quixokie {{Like tax cuts for the wealthy who don't create a single job? Like the coal, petroleum and gas industries who suck billions out of the tax payers teat, and have politicians apologize to them like Joe Barton did to BP, when they've killed Americans, destroyed ecologies and economies. Why do you hate Americans who aren't wealthy so much?}}
No, I don't "hate" anyone, but I find it pathetic when individuals need scapegoats, such as corporations, as an excuse for their own personal problems and need 'social justice' to steal from others to remedy a situation often made bad by their own poor decisions and greed. How is Obama working to address this issue for you? He just gave $2B of our tax payer dollars to Brazil to help them with their offshore oil drilling capabilities so they can then sell their oil to us vs. investing in our own oil companies and resources to bring cheaper energy to our middle class. Again, what have the Democrats done over the past 2 years with Obama to address these so-called "socially unjust" corporations? You attack coal, petroleun and gas... what are your alternatives wind and solar? LOL Keep charging those windmills.
Got right on the phone to my California Republican congressman this morning. Told the folks there was no upside for the congressman on this and to vote Schuster down. Thanks Ed. Your going good.
Hey Ed!
Love your show, those Republicans need to be held accountable. I was looking around for the latest from wisconsin and found this: Turns out it was just an April Fools Joke! So disappointing. . .