Today's edition of quick hits:
* The FBI confirmed on the record today that it has opened a "preliminary investigation" into JPMorgan's massive trading loss.
* Greece: "As Greek political leaders assembled a caretaker government Wednesday to usher in new elections next month, bankers across Athens were monitoring a worrisome development: the continued flight of billions of euros from the country amid renewed concern over Greece's fate within the euro currency union."
* Vice President Biden's working class background gives him credibility to make comments like these on the stump in Ohio:
* The National Coalition for Men endorsed the House Republicans' watered-down version of the Violence Against Women Act today, arguing that it doesn't do enough for men. This probably isn't the support the GOP leadership was hoping for.
* Collecting what's owed may be impossible: "A Weston, Fla., family has won a landmark $323 million court decision against Iran and Syria, six years after their son was killed by a suicide bomber in Tel Aviv."
* I'd sure like to see it: "Why Justice Souter should publish his secret dissent in Citizens United."
* Hawaii has banned plastic bags at checkout counters altogether, a national first.
* Just go away: "In his newest video, conservative videographer James O'Keefe claims that during his organization's latest inept voter fraud sting in North Carolina, 'we found ballots being offered out in the name of the dead.' Unfortunately for O'Keefe, the person whose ballot his operative sought is actually alive, as is indicated by the raw video his organization posted online."
Anything to add? Consider this an open thread.
Leave a Comment:
If the Obama campaign follows A.B. Stoddard's advice Obama is doomed.
"If the Obama campaign follows A.B. Stoddard's advice Obama is doomed."
I believe that is the intent. Without fail, everytime I see Stoddard on TV she takes the GOP line. She is a GOP shill and not very good at hiding it.
"call it class warfare". lol
She is a journalist, but sounds like a RNC spokesperson.
The Vıce Presıdent made ıt clear he wasn't denıgratıng "rıch people" but rather at the GOP and Mıtt Romney for not understandıng how hard ıt ıs for average people to get by, let alone succeed. I wonder ıf Ms. Stoddard watched some other Joe Bıden gıve a speech.
Paul Krugman wrote about the wıder ımplıcatıons of Greek cıtızens wıthdrawıng Euro deposıts from banks ın that country, notıng that the European Central Bank wıll be forced - despıte what Germany and Angela Merkel wants - to make massıve loans to Greek banks to keep them from collapsıng under the "bank jog." Thanks to Germany, Spaın may face a sımılar problem ın ıts fınancıal sector.
you understand the situation very well. angela merkel's policy is a sham, and the greeks know it but don't have enough influence to change it. so i'd take my money out for a bit, wait for the dust to settle, and bring it back. i think germany is up for a rude awakening, partially in thanks to france, but mostly because their austerity program continues to be proven to be a sham.
I don't really follow "The Hill", but Stoddard might be in that same bubble that's over Capitol Hill. I think Biden showed passionate answer to "main streeters", whom are not envious of rich people. They would like to know they have access to whatever they dream about, including being rich.
She said Biden was "going after" rich people. He wasn't. She sounds like she has selective hearing. She seems to be in the bubble, Biden doesn't.
I like the male speaker telling the hostess "and hear me out on this one", this is good as she likes to hammer her own agenda above her guests as was blatanly displayed the other day when she shut off the Rmoney Rep.. (not that I minded at all!) I took everyone's opinion here with a grain of salt. Opinions are like Mitt Rmoney, everybody has one.
I think Tamron saw what was obviously clear, that Stoddard was towing the GOP line and what she was saying did not make sense as a political analysis. And Tamron pointed out why.
She called it class warfare. She didn't even make the effort to pull a "some people say". She's doing terribly on her Fox News audition.
It is beginning to make sense now. I finally have it figured out. False prophets have led the Republican party down the path of enlightenment where they have taken on the "mark of the beast". The anti-Christ Christians who seek fame and glory and world domination are ready with their excuses. A) the devil made us do it B)I was misquoted C)but we needed to create an anti-Christ to rule so Jesus could come D) We did it in your name
Yes sir keep thumping that bible as you preach bigotry and hatred. Point and accuse then look confused when you hear "judge not lest ye be judged". Golden rule? Oh you mean do unto others before they catch on to what you are doing?
Love that last sentence.
"Oh you mean do unto others before they catch on to what you are doing?"
http://www.change.org/petitions/major-media-companies-stop-accepting-money-from-superpacs
We can't change the Supreme Court ruling but we can do this!!!!
Good luck - a media company will not turn down a paying advertiser, especially with the amount of money that has and will be spent.
I will like to see who outspends who in total. The Democrats have outspent the Republicans in the last two election cycles nationwide including that record $750 Million spent by the Obama campaign (and they are shooting for $1 Billion this time around - NOT including superPAC $$, just for the Presidency).
Stoddard:
"I think when VP Biden gets up and says: They don't get us, those rich people"
Stoddard distorted what Biden said in order to make her GOP talking points work.
VP Biden:
"I resent that they think we're talking about -- we're envious, it's job envy, it's wealth envy . . ."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1o-CApj1v4
That's not an attack on rich people, that's an attack and push back on Romney's own words.
And leave it to the spineless Dem to agree with her.
You think a Republican goes on these shows in an election year and EVER concedes a point that would reflect poorly on a GOP candidate?
No way. They know how the game is played and they know how to win.
Pathetic unemployables like Jimmy O'Keefe are proof the English were right about the Irish in at least a few instances.
When I woke today and saw what the republicans were doing with the abuse against woman bill, I burst into tears. This is a new low for them.
I am 1/4 Choctaw. Does this mean I am below this law and therefore it is OK for me to be abused?
deda, I'm sorry for your tears, but I must disagree somewhat. This is not a new low for the disgusting r's. This is an average, every day level of hurtful, misogynistic b.s. which makes them feel big and strong and powerful, because they have the ability to make, or try to make, some other person's life more miserable.
Please don't give them credit for coming down from some higher place. This isn't new, it isn't out of the ordinary, it's totally consistent with the ugly face they show the world every day.
Everything you need to know about the National Coalition for Men in one clueless, fearful and incredibly ignorant comments thread:
http://ncfm.org/2012/05/uncategorized/how-women-are-winning-the-world-out-numbered-out-organized-and-out-funded/
The nano brained nitwit vote is alive and well at NCfM.
Wow! I never seen so such insecurity and misogyny in one place. What pitiful men.
Remember that city anti-discrimination ordinance Rachel mentioned last night which passed recently in Lincoln, NE? Well, now there's a petition drive to put a stop to that. It's Pavlovian with these people, isn't it? They just have to be the cloud to any sunny day.
Why Barack Obama is against providing protection to heterosexual males, while homosexual men can seek protection under VAWA? If gay men can seek protection, then why the name of this bill still contain the word "women"? Are gay men same as women? The hypocrisy is out there to see as Obama and democrat team refuses to change the name to "intimate partner violence act (IPVA)".
And so it begins. Just go away. There's nothing for your kind here. We deal in facts and reality, not stupidly willful ignorance. Crawl back into your "man cave" (whatever the hell that is) and pickle yourself in misogyny and stale light beer.
The latest on FontGate.
http://www.democracy-tree.com/whistleblower-snyder-administration-corruption-scandal/
As conservative talking points discuss the view of democrats' and or liberals' view of redistribution of wealth and the value of business models, I wonder if either you or Chris Hayes has thought about how some corporations fund what they do. In insurance, for instance, it seems to me that all premiums paid are redistributed, pooled, for the general "good," i.e., paying claims, death, homes, cars, medical expenses. If a claim of mine is paid most likely I have not paid that full amount to the insurance company. Nor has only my monthly insurance premium been separated from everyone else's and invested just for me. I am thinking specifically about healthcare because of the impending Supreme Court decision. My relatives do not want to contribute to anyone else's needs and are against the mandate and the "threat" of socialism. It seems to me that is how insurance companies are set up (pooling all incoming premiums) to be able to pay claims. I worked for some small companies who could not afford to offer health care benefits as could large companies. We were told we were not big enough and the insurance companies could not give us the plan offered to big companies. When we said we wanted to join with other small companies to form some sort of an alliance to be able to offer an affordable package to our employees, the insurance company said that was unacceptable because we were not one company. I wonder if someone like Wendell Potter could discuss corporate models in this respect. Thanks for your consideration.
I worked for one company that offered heath insurance. I paid 50%. I was there 8 years with out one claim. I think I must have paid for some ones. Another company, I paid 42% and was there 9 years with 1 claim for $290.00. I think the rest of my money paid for somebody. I've paid car insurance for over 30 years with NO claims. I think I paid for somebody. Get real.
I have been saying insurance of all types are pooling of money, where the claimant uses other peoples' money to help themselves. There may be fraud, like intentional fire and the like… but the cost is shared and the company does administer it.
I think exchanges address the issue, but when some people pay and some don't, it is causing a huge drain on taxpayers.
My preference is single payer with excise taxes to cover basic health care needs and there is money coming in from more people paying for cigarettes and alcohol, or wherever the tax is applied.
There is the FINRA that oversees the Securities Investments, but the socialism aspect is overstated, I think. The refusal to consider single payer public option was premature (because of politics, I think) It's pretty clear that the mandate would be a fine for not buying insurance to augment the cost of heath care taxpayers are already paying for Medicaid, Medicare, V.A. and such.
The insurance requirement may have been better done through excise taxes, but on a state level, you are required to buy insurance if you drive a vehicle and employers are required to pay excise tax for unemployment http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/3301.
There would be no way to get blood from a turnip (so to speak) but generally there would be a pooling of money to be allocated to pay for the health care of those who need essential care. My brother may be alive today, if this were the case. He needed medical attention, but had no insurance or money, so he put it off. The day before his doctor appointment, he was in big trouble, 911 was called. Now he is dead (last month). But the bills for ambulance and hospital are still waiting to be paid. Just one case.
The obvious question is who pays for this care? We do, those of us that pay premiums, pay more... plus the profit taking must be included. Taxpayers already pay for ER doctor visits, Medicare, Medicaid. If we regulate and collect funds to pay for the needed care, taxpayers are paying less and premiums would go down.
It appears 2014 is the beginning of small business tax credits, exchanges, etc. http://www.healthcare.gov/news/factsheets/2011/08/small-business.html
Marie
I work at a non-profit institution. When our health insurance premiums became too high we joined a sister institution (Cal-Tech) insurance pool. In that pool a variety of health insurance options are offered. I was on the Anthem HMO plan but was very dissatisfied with the service that I was offered. So when it came time to decided on what health insurance I would take for the next year I switched to Kaiser.
I am satisfied with service I am receiving with Kaiser. Would have I been able to do that if I was all on my own? No I would not. Like in some things there is stregnth in numbers. If I am not mistaken part of the ACA is to set-up pools for individuals and companiesto get affordable health insurance. If the SCOTUS strikes down the ACA you kiss that option good bye.
What Maire says is correct- I don't know what the Supreme Court will do and something needs to be done on cost of health care- my company is of a size where it is viewed "to small" by insurance companies (i.e. 250 staff and employees) and as a result we face higher and higher premiums. Currently employees pay $85 a month for full coverage. Principals in the firm however pay $1300 a month. Our rates went up 15% this year and our insurance consultants advise that we are looking at an increase of that amount or more next year. Unfortunately we will have to look at whether not to provide for health insurance, pay the penalty and provide some support to employees to buy individual policies in the market place or through the exchanges assuming they are implemented-