Why after all these years can't our government bring itself to tell us the truth about Iraq?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
I don't know about you, but I'm a little tired of being treated like a mushroom by my government. You know... kept in the dark and fed fertilizer.
President Obama is hailing the end of the Iraq war as though the enemy had signed the terms of surrender on the deck of the U.S.S. Missouri. What hogwash.
This is the same war Obama referred to as dumb nine years ago, but now it's "Hail to the Chief," marching bands and rah-rah-rah. Look what we did.
What we did was invade a country that had done nothing to us, killed hundreds of thousands of their people as well as thousands of our own, bankrupted the Treasury in the process - all in the search for weapons of mass destruction that a cynic might suggest we knew didn't exist in the first place.
The Iraqi government told us a few months ago to get the hell out of their country. That's why we're leaving. We're being kicked out. Nothing noble about that.
Before we were told to take a hike though, we built the largest embassy in the world along with more than 500 military bases at the height of the war. All at taxpayers' expense.
We had every intention of occupying. We had no intention of going anywhere. See there's all that oil over there.
As it is, we will leave behind some 17,000 people at that embassy compound. Yes, some will be members of the diplomatic corps, but there will also be contractors and intel folks who can keep an eye on things. Just in case those weapons of mass destruction turn up. Or Iran tries to fill the power vacuum, which it will.
What garbage. And the government has the gall to paint this as some sort of military triumph.
This isn't the end of anything. It's the beginning of a long-term occupation not unlike Japan and Korea and Germany.
Here’s my question to you: Why after all these years can't our government bring itself to tell us the truth about Iraq?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
What do you fear most: big government, big business or big labor?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Fear of big government is close to record highs here in the U.S.
According to a new Gallup poll, 64% of those surveyed say big government is the biggest threat to the country. That's one point off the all-time high.
Compare that to 26% who are most worried about big business... and only 8% who say the biggest threat comes from big labor.
Americans have always been more concerned about big government than about big business or big labor since this question was first asked in 1965.
But what's interesting here is that Democrats actually lead the increase in concern about big government... this during the term of a Democratic president, Barack Obama.
Almost half of Democrats now say big government is the biggest threat to the U.S. That's up significantly from two years ago And more significantly, it's higher than the number of Democrats who worry about big business.
These poll numbers may also suggest that the Occupy Wall Street movement isn't catching on.
Despite the movement's targeting of corporate America, most Americans don't view big business as the greatest threat to the country.
In fact, the public's concerns about big business are down since 2009. Worries about big business actually peaked in 2002 - after the scandals at Enron and Worldcom.
But what the American people are worried about is big government and the role it plays in their day-to-day lives.
A government that has only gotten bigger under a president who's running for re-election.
Here’s my question to you: What do you fear most: big government, big business or big labor?
Tune in to the Situation Room at 5pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.
And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.
Do members of the super committee deserve to be re-elected?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
The super committee is a disgrace, and there should be a price to pay for their negligence. Their failure will cost all of us. The national debt continues to spiral out of control, and they did nothing. They knew the consequences of their actions and still chose to do nothing.
They were charged with agreeing on $1.2 trillion in cuts to the national debt over 10 years. Congress borrowed $1.3 trillion just this year alone. It wasn't too much to ask.
Actions are supposed to have consequences. Most of the time they do, unless you're a member of the federal government.
The super committee is just the latest group of politicians to lie to us about reducing government spending. The Simpson-Bowles commission put forth a program for cutting the debt. It was ignored. Likewise the Gang of Six.
Even before the super committee failed, one poll showed Congress' approval rating at an all-time low of 9%. It was the first time Congress scored in the single digits in this poll since the question was first asked in the 1970s.
This same survey shows Americans have less trust than ever in government to do the right thing. And with good reason.
The members of the super committee didn't even have the guts to face the public and tell us they failed. They handed reporters a piece of paper announcing their failure and then disappeared into the woodwork like so many cockroaches.
But the real crime in all this is that most of these 12 people on the committee will probably be re-elected the next time they run for office. And that's something of which we should all be ashamed.
If you or I failed so miserably at our jobs, we would be out on the street. And that's exactly where these folks belong along with the rest of their colleagues who make up our broken government.
Here’s my question to you: Do members of the super committee deserve to be re-elected?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
How long can we go on with almost half of Americans living in households that get government assistance?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Yet another sign of our very troubled times:
Almost half of Americans - 48.5% - live in a household that gets some kind of government aid.
That's a record high according to census data for the first quarter of 2010. It's up from about 44% of the population in 2008... and from less than 30% in 1983.
Here's how it breaks down:
More than 34% of Americans live in a household that gets either food stamps, subsidized housing, cash welfare or Medicaid. Applications for these programs are up nearly 50% in the past decade.
More than 14% live in homes where someone is on Medicare.
16% live in homes getting Social Security.
But that's only half the story.
As unemployment hovers above 9%, more than 46 million Americans live below the poverty line. And as more people turn to government assistance, there are fewer people actually paying taxes to support all these programs.
It's estimated that more than 46% of households will pay no federal income tax this year. In 2010, 45% of households paid no federal income tax.
It doesn't take a mathematician to figure out that this is unsustainable.
With fewer than half of Americans paying federal taxes - and just about half living in a family that gets government aid - this country is headed down the drain. And fast.
It's no wonder the crowds protesting around the country keep growing with every passing day.
Here’s my question to you: How long can we go on with almost half of Americans living in households that get government assistance?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Are the protests spreading across the U.S. the sign of an 'American Spring'?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Today is the 20th day of protests down on Wall Street ... and the movement is picking up steam all across the country.
The demonstrators are critical of the growing economic gap in the United States. They say they take their inspiration from the "Arab Spring" protests that overthrew governments and dictators and continue to cause massive chaos across the Middle East and North Africa.
But in the beginning, barely anyone even noticed. There were a few hundred people with signs, peacefully walking around Manhattan's Financial District, talking about corporate greed and inequality.
And when they were finally noticed, they weren't taken seriously. Reporters made fun of them, saying they didn't even know what they protesting about.
Well, now the unions are joining in and supporting them, and the crowds are suddenly starting to look like this. There were thousands of protesters in Lower Manhattan on Wednesday. There have been hundreds of arrests.
And it's not just New York. Protesters are beginning to take to the streets nationwide, including in Los Angeles; Boston; San Francisco; Denver; Chicago; Seattle; Spokane, Washington; Philadelphia; Houston; Dallas; Tampa; St. Louis; Savannah, Georgia; Hartford, Connecticut; and Washington.
This isn't a joke, and the media would be well advised to take them seriously. Their grievances are real, their numbers are growing, and the rest of us would be well advised to pay attention.
So far, these protests have been peaceful, for the most part. So far. But the more they spread and grow, the bigger a problem it becomes for Washington.
Our federal government should take note. Protests over economic conditions and government cutbacks have turned violent elsewhere in the world. People will only take so much.
Here’s my question to you: Are the protests spreading across the U.S. the sign of an "American Spring"?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Our government is more badly divided than maybe it has ever been. What's the answer?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
The public's trust in the federal government is at an all-time low, which is no big surprise. They're lucky in Washington the citizens haven't marched on the place yet.
There's a new CNN/ORC International Poll out Wednesday that shows only 15% of Americans say they trust the government in Washington to do what's right always or most of the time. Fifteen percent.
Seventy-seven percent say they trust the federal government only some of the time. And 8% say they never do.
Just last year 25% of Americans felt they could trust the federal government always or most of the time. Before the Watergate scandal in the 1970s, the majority of Americans felt this way. But the only time Americans have had such trust in the government since the 1970s was right after 9/11.
Meanwhile, as both parties appeal to their bases and emphasize their differences with the opposition, another new poll suggests what Americans really want is compromise.
The Gallup survey shows for the first time a majority of Americans say it's more important for politicians to compromise than to stick to their beliefs.
Tea party members are the only group in this poll who say it's more important for politicians to stick to their beliefs. Again, no surprise there.
All this comes as the federal government just barely averted another shutdown, this time over a disaster funding bill. Last month, our lawmakers took us to the brink of default on our national debt obligations as they wrangled over an increase in the debt ceiling.
And you can bet when the supercommittee comes out with its deficit-cutting proposals there will be lots more ugly partisanship from our leaders. It seems to be all they know how to do these days.
Here’s my question to you: Our government is more badly divided than maybe it has ever been. What's the answer?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Do you think of the government as your 'federal family'?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Don't think of it as the government... instead try to think about those weaselly politicians in Washington as your "federal family."
The Obama administration has ramped up the use of this term in describing the federal government's response to disasters, including the recent Hurricane Irene.
For example, they described "the entire federal family" - under the direction of President Obama and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano - "leaning forward" to support state and local governments. Does that make the president and Napolitano the parents? What a thought.
"Government" has become a dirty word in most parts of this country... Congress' approval rating is the worst it's ever been, and the president's is at or near all-time lows. Think debt ceiling debate, the downgrading of America's credit rating, etc. It's no surprise that federal officials may be trying to re-brand themselves. And "family" could conjure up images of support and security instead of an unpopular government.
Also, politicians have re-branded other unpopular words... "revenue enhancers" instead of "taxes"... or "the estate tax" instead of the "death tax."
Officials are quick to point out that the idea of the "federal family" is nothing new. the term was used under both the Clinton and Bush administrations - including by former FEMA director michael brown, also known as "you're doing a heckuva job, Brownie". But the Obama administration has taken the use of the phrase to new heights.
Critics doubt the so-called "federal family" will give people warm, fuzzy feelings about government. Instead it might make people think of "big brother" or the mafia, or if family, a highly dysfunctional one.
Here’s my question to you: Do you think of the government as your "federal family"?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
100 CEOs pledge no political donations
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Maybe Washington will finally listen... now that some in corporate America are taking aim at their bank accounts.
This has the potential to get interesting.
More than 100 CEOs have signed a pledge to stop all political campaign contributions until lawmakers stop the gridlock. That could be a while.
Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz is leading the movement. He says it seems like lawmakers are only interested in re-election... he's right about that... and that the lifeblood of re-election is fund-raising.
In just a week - Schultz has gotten more than 100 business leaders on board... including the CEOs of AOL, Whole Foods, Intuit, Zipcar, J. Crew... and billionaire investor Pete Peterson.
Schultz says his initiative has "triggered a national dialogue and a groundswell of support." He hopes ordinary Americans join in too.
The pledge has leaders agreeing to stop campaign contributions until lawmakers strike a "bipartisan, balanced long-term debt deal that addresses both entitlements and revenues."
The CEOs are also agreeing to look for ways to speed up job growth.
It's unclear how much impact Schultz's pledge will have but it's worth pointing out that a pretty small number of Americans make the bulk of political donations in this country.
Less than one half of one percent of Americans give more than $200 to candidates and political parties and those donations make up 65% of all contributions.
Here’s my question to you: More than 100 CEOs have signed a pledge to not make political donations. How will it affect Washington?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
What does it mean when British & French govts work harder than America’s?
Cabinet members leave 10 Downing Street this morning following British PM David Cameron's meeting to discuss the unrest that has spread across the UK. Parliament was recalled following four days of rioting. (PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
As the global economy hangs on by a thread, maybe our leaders should take some notes from the British and the French.
In England - Prime Minister David Cameron cut his vacation short and called Parliament back from theirs to hold a special session today. They're dealing with the worst rioting and violence that country has seen in decades; and there's no doubt economic instability and high unemployment are partly to blame.
Meanwhile French President Nicolas Sarkozy returned to Paris from the Riviera to deal with France's own financial crisis. Bank shares are plunging there; and he's pledged drastic austerity measures. He's even recalled the French parliament from their vacation to vote on a balanced budget amendment to their constitution.
Hop over the pond here to the U.S. ... where our Congress is on vacation for five weeks; and President Obama is headed off on his own vacation to Martha's Vineyard.
The only thing of any consequence that Congress has done in the last month or so was to fail to stave off the first credit downgrade in our history. And once they finished that - they couldn't get out of town fast enough. No wonder they have a measly approval rating of 14%.
Meanwhile President Obama's own approval ratings are at or very near all-time lows as he gets ready to try to convince the country he deserves a second term. The White House was out defending Mr. Obama of course, saying presidents are never really on vacation and that they take their work with them.
Nonetheless it's all about appearances. Our president and Congress choose to go on vacation while our country struggles under an economy perhaps lurching toward another recession and a debt crisis no one has been very serious about solving.
How dare the people think the government is disconnected from reality.
Here’s my question to you: What does it mean when the British and especially the French governments work harder than America's?
Tune in to the Situation Room at 5pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.
And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.
Faith in "super committee" to fix debt woes?
The National Debt Clock, a billboard-sized digital display showing increasing U.S. debt, as seen August 1, 2011 in New York City. (PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
The saying goes "where there's a will there's a way"... but it's not clear if our leaders have the political will - or the backbone - to fix the country's serious debt troubles.
We'll find out soon enough when the so-called super committee gets to work. We're starting to learn who will make up this powerful group... including John Kerry on the Democratic side and John Kyl for the Republicans. Their job is to cut the deficit by $1.5 trillion over 10 years.
To do that, they must take on the issues of tax increases and entitlement cuts. So far, Congress has refused to touch either issue - even though the country is insolvent and now has had its credit rating downgraded for the first time in our history.
With an election coming up next year, what makes anyone think they will suddenly make the tough decisions now?
Consider Washington's track record on the issue of deficit reduction:
Last year, President Obama named a bipartisan debt commission - which had a lot of this stuff in it. The proposals came out after the midterms, and were ignored. Then there was the gang of six in the Senate which also recommended tax reform and changing entitlement programs. That went nowhere, too. The last time there was a significant drop in federal government spending was 1954. This is all cheap political theater.
A new CNN/ORC International poll shows 63% of Americans want the committee to recommend higher taxes for the wealthy and business. 57% say the proposal should also include major cuts in domestic spending.
But majorities of those polled don't want major changes to social security and medicare... or tax increases on the middle class and poor.
It's the "have your cake and eat it" syndrome.
Here’s my question to you: How much faith do you have in the "super committee" to fix our debt woes?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
@jackcafferty on Twitter
Recent Comments