Wednesday Reads, AM Edition…

Deep Freeze

Happy Wednesday Morning, Minx here with what’s going on.  I don’t know about you all, but this deep freeze has me questioning my sanity…three straight “snow days” means the kids have been home, driving me crazy. Anyway, I hope everyone is staying warm, and if you need a warming up…the latest news will get your blood pressure boiling.

I will start the morning reads with the latest controversy on the Hill…namely the pork chop laden bills that have many people wondering WTF?

On the website Taxpayers for Common Sense, there is a PDF report that you can download…
Taxpayers for Common Sense Holiday Honey Baked Hams — Special Interest Carveouts at the End of the Year

The last legislative trains are pulling out of Capitol Hill station and there are a bunch of hobo provisions trying to catch a ride. Whether you are for or against the grand tax compromise the President and Congressional Republicans hammered out, or the proposed final spending bills for fiscal year 2011, one has to admit larding them up with parochial provisions is the wrong way to go.

Top sweeteners in 2010 tax bill

The tax extension package being debated in the Senate does much more than meets the eyes. While most people are focused on the bill’s most prominent provisions—renewal of the Bush tax cuts, a temporary fix for the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), extension of unemployment benefits for a year, changes to the estate tax— it’s also chock full of dozens of narrow and special interest provisions. While possibly laudable, these narrow, “temporary” provisions are routinely extended, often annually, without a thorough evaluation of their effectiveness. Added together, these narrow provisions result in tens of billions of dollars in special tax breaks without any real debate where Congress determines they are the best way to spur the economy or meet other goals.

After you take a look at that, check this out:

Earmarks Requested for 2011 « Taxpayers Against Earmarks |

Roll over the map or click on specific states and districts to see how Members of Congress are requesting your money be spent.

I am sure that will give you at least a good hour of browsing.   I can tell you that after looking at these reports, I wonder why anyone would not vote for unemployment extensions…or the First Responders bill , of which:

The $7.4 billion cost of the legislation over 10 years is paid for by a provision that would prevent foreign multinational corporations from using tax havens to avoid taxes on U.S. income.


Last week, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) released a letter signed by every Senate Republican pledging to block all legislative action until Congress acts on the expiring Bush tax cuts and passes a measure to fund the federal government into 2011.

As Politico points out:

Three hundred fifty thousand dollars for cool-season legume research in Idaho, North Dakota and Washington. A half million dollars for road roundabouts in Mississippi. And $1 million for arthropod damage in Nevada.

They’re just a few of the 6,600 pet projects lawmakers from both parties – and both chambers – stuck inside an enormous spending bill unveiled by Senate Democrats on Tuesday, according to government watchdog Taxpayers for Common Sense. The release of the $1.1 trillion dollar omnibus bill, including $8 billion in earmarks, quickly reignited the fight over pork-barrel spending in the final days of the lame-duck session.


Earlier this year, McConnell asked for $4 million for marijuana eradication efforts by the Kentucky National Guard; $1 million for construction of the Kentucky Blood Center Building; and $650,000 for Advanced Genetic Technologies, a DNA research center at the University of Kentucky.

What a surprise, 5.6 million of that 8 billion is earmarks for that beady-eyed man from Kentucky, Mitch McConnell himself. So, he will block all legislative actions until the Bush tax cuts for the rich are passed.  What a guy! Which brings me to another few items that I want to discuss this morning. Do progressives hate rich people?

Do Progressives Hate Rich People? | Firedoglake

Roger Simon looks at the Congressional Democrats trying to block the Obama-McConnell tax-cut-extensions-for-everybody-whether-they-need-them-or-not bill, and draws the only possible conclusion: Democrats hate rich people, and want everyone else to hate them too.

Yes, of course, that must be it: All those self-hating rich Democrats in Congress just want to punish themselves to assuage their terrible rich-person guilt – who could possibly think otherwise?

Well, when I was a kid my father always used to make a point, by walking the dogs next to Cadillacs so they would piss on them. And if the dogs didn’t step up to the plate, my father did.

I don’t really want to speak for the Democrats whom I feel increasingly estranged from, but I can’t let this foolishness pass unchallenged. So I will address it from my own non-rich progressive perspective, which I think is at least somewhat representative.

Simon is really employing two fallacies for the price of one. The first is that the desire to return the well-to-do’s tax brackets to their Clinton-era levels is somehow the same as implacable hatred. We are living in a time of extreme deficit hysteria, with the President and both parties buying into the right-wing fallacy that if we don’t balance the budget America will be destroyed. Set against that backdrop, the addition of another $800 billion to the debt boogeyman means even more pressure to cut social programs and Social Security, and to never spend anything on stimulus or unemployment insurance ever again.

It is simply cruel and unfair to funnel money away from the people who need it most and towards the people who need it least – especially in the middle of a prolonged recession with almost 10% unemployment – and that’s what we want to prevent.

The second fallacy is that we hate rich people simply for being rich, because we’re envious or communists or whatever. Not so, at least not for me. I have absolutely nothing against rich people in general, and I like and admire many of them. But I do hate rich people who believe that they are so valuable and important that they deserve to be rewarded with even more money just for being rich, even if it’s at the expense of someone who needs it far more than they do. Or those who complain that they’re some kind of persecuted minority because they might lose a tax cut that’s more than most Americans earn in an entire year. Maybe a million dollars doesn’t go as far as it used to, but it still goes a hell of a lot farther than an unemployment check… or no check at all.

There was also this from Howard Fineman “Democrat” Is No Longer A Brand. I will refer you to a post by Taylor Marsh that discusses this Fineman article.

Howard Fineman is as hacktacular at times as Richard Wolffe. But every once in a while he comes out with stuff that nails what the media propaganda machine does to Democrats. The irony and what makes him hacktacular is that he doesn’t even realize he’s a cog in his own confusion. Via Huffington Post:

The fact that extension is being touted by the White House as a major “get” is a sad commentary on how far to the right our politics is now moving, no matter how many times Tea Party types call Obama a socialist.

[…] …something doesn’t compute. Isn’t a nearly $1 trillion bill full of tax cuts and industry giveaways what Republicans do? Isn’t a bill with an absurdly generous inheritance tax break what Republicans write? Aren’t Democrats the “party of the people?” Aren’t they the party that believes government programs and policies have a role to play in leveling the playing field, or at least giving everyone a fair chance? Aren’t the Democrats worried that all of this tax cutting now will starve the social programs they supposedly cherish? Do they know that they won’t be able to push through a change in taxes in 2012 over GOP objections if the economy in fact improves?

How many months have I been writing about Pres. Obama taking national politics rightward? How long? It’s been well over a year, but now Howard Fineman jumps in to also announce that Democrats are no longer a brand. The two realities go together.


Democrats in the era of Obama are too spineless to stop production on the political version of “Who Wants to be a Millionaire?,” where the President is now playing Regis Philbin, and the wealthiest Americans are getting a big fat bonus just like Obama’s pals on Wall Street.

Read the entire Marsh piece…it is spot on.

Speaking of spineless, did you see that Obama has reached out to a local Denver news anchor…he says “I don‘t think there’s a sense that I’ve been successful. I think people feel that Washington still is dysfunctional.” See this post here on Mediaite.

First of all, in this modern media environment, does Obama really and truly believe the only way to reach the folks outside of Washington is to speak to a local news anchor? And if he doesn’t actually believe that statement, then why engage in such an interview at all? Secondly, after two years of Obama being in complete control, if Washington is still dysfunctional and Obama himself admits that he hasn’t been successful enough to create the perception of a triumphant presidency, then how long exactly would it take for an Obama administration to make Washington functional again? At the end of four years maybe? Or would Obama’s vision for making Washington work be timed to crystalize only within a second term as President? Or maybe just maybe, Obama’s position is that Washington will forever be dysfunctional and it is beyond the capabilities of any one individual as President to fix it?

I wonder what the spineless one will do when he gets together with the CEOs of 20 big ass corporations. I have waited for the outcome of this meeting since it was announced a few days ago. Obama to Discuss Jobs, Economy With CEOs – Washington Wire – WSJ

President Barack Obama plans to sit down with 20 corporate chief executives Wednesday morning to discuss jobs and the economy. Presidential adviser Valerie Jarrett said the meeting is part of a renewed effort to form “partnerships” with Corporate America on issues from education to trade.

The meeting will be closed to the media, to encourage participants—who have been encouraged to bring substantive ideas–to be candid. In the past, some have complained that highly public gatherings discouraged frank talk.

The summit, at Blair House, adjacent to the White House, will include lunch and is expected to extend into the afternoon.

The participants are all familiar faces at the White House; several already serve on presidential advisory councils. That disappoints some business observers who say a fresh approach calls for fresh faces. “Obviously there’s some continuity… people that you’ve seen before, but I think you’ll also see people that have also not spent a lot of time here,” White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said Tuesday.

My biggest problem with this, what else do these big money companies think they can squeeze out of Obama?  My guess is that most of these companies have outsourced like crazy…making products in other countries or having call centers outside of the one country that could use those jobs.  All these recent happenings just makes me think that Dak and BB and Wonk need to trademark the phrase “We are so F’d!” and plaster this all over t-shirts and bumper stickers…because it is a catch phrase that pretty much expresses the current situation truthfully and succinctly.

Now for a couple of links that may amuse or interest you…

Barack’s not the man that Hillary is: Elise Patkotak |

Against all that is normal and usual in our universe, my cousin Joe likes Hillary Clinton. He told me I would have buyer’s remorse with Barack Obama long before Obama’s term was anywhere near over. He suggested that if we wanted a real man in the office of president, we should elect Hillary. And dagnabit if he wasn’t right.

Well, to all those Obama supporters, we told you so! (I will say this with a smile and a wink.) 😉

Clinton best ever State Secy: Obama – Hindustan Times

There is a growing bipartisan consensus that Hillary Clinton is the best ever Secretary of State, US President Barack Obama has said. His decision to appoint Clinton as the Secretary of State was one of his better decisions, the US President has said. Obama who made a rare appearance at the Foggy Bottom headquarters of the State Department to attend the holiday reception party hosted by the Washington’s vibrant diplomatic community by Clinton said, “I think there’s a consensus building that this may be one of the best Secretaries of State we’ve ever had in this country’s history.”

Something I can agree with Obama…yes, Hillary was your best decision.

I will end this post with a op-ed piece by Caroline B. Glick at the Jerusalem Post Our World: The feminist deception

Since the height of the feminist movement in the late 1960s, non-leftist women in the West and Israel have been hard-pressed to answer the question of whether or not we are feminists. Non-leftist women are opposed to the oppression of women. Certainly, we are no less opposed to the oppression of women than leftist women are.

But at its most basic level, the feminist label has never been solely or even predominantly about preventing and ending oppression or discrimination of women. It has been about advancing the Left’s social and political agenda against Western societies. It has been about castigating societies where women enjoy legal rights and protections as “structurally” discriminatory against women in order to weaken the legal, moral and social foundations of those societies. That is, rather than being about advancing the cause of women, to a large extent, the feminist movement has used the language of women’s rights to advance a social and political agenda that has nothing to do with women.

So to a large degree, the feminist movement itself is a deception.

The deception at the heart of the feminist movement is nowhere more apparent than in the silence with which self-professed feminists and feminist movements ignore the inhumane treatment of women who live under Islamic law. If feminism weren’t a hollow term, then prominent feminists should be the leaders of the anti-jihad movement.

I won’t make any comment on this one,  yet, I want to see what discussion follows….since the question of what makes a woman a feminist has been a topic we have discussed of and on recently.

So what have you been reading, I am sure we will have a late edition of Wednesday Reads…with all that has gone on, you know the Sky Dancing team will be on top of it.

59 Comments on “Wednesday Reads, AM Edition…”

  1. fiscalliberal says:

    Excellent and timely post with a lot of relevant information

    All participants on Morning Joe strongly castigated the Bush Tax cut extension and the War in Afghanistan. Even Mica, who will defend Obama to the extreeme, said it is out of control.

    I find it amazing that Liberals, who are asking only for budget solvency are the one’s taking the hit.

  2. TheRock says:

    Nice post Minx!

    I disagree with the statement that Hillary is a better man for the job than Obama. In this statement, you are assuming that Obama is a man…

    Obumbles is meeting with CEOs again? How is it that he doesn’t have ANY original ideas of his own? My president spends an hour a day just pondering the economy, and one of the ideas that he put forward in South Africa would tremendously ease the suffering of the people. This meeting is closed to the public so I can only guess how much Obumbles is going to give away. Lets see if he has the nerve to tell us that we are lucky to still have him. Asshat.

    So Howard Finemann realizes now that fellating Obumbles was a waste of everybody’s time except Obumbles, huh? Asshat.

    Hillary 2012

    • Branjor says:

      Sorry to disrupt your delusional system, but Obama *is* a man. And Hillary, clearly the better of the two, is not.

      • I took The Rock’s statement to be more along the lines of suggesting Obama isn’t a grownup (“man” as opposed to child) with whom the buck ever stops, but I may be mistaken.

      • Minkoff Minx says:

        I took it as a joke…

        • Branjor says:

          It’s really a mind game, MM. Say it often enough, man=good, woman=bad, and sooner or later you begin to believe it, if only on a subliminal level. It’s really not funny at all.

          • Minkoff Minx says:

            I meant that I took Rocks comment about Obama being a man as a joke…

            I don’t know, sometimes I think people can read too much into a quick comment on a blog. We are unable to see the body language and expressions, or hear the tonal qualities of the voice, that usually go with one on one communication. Again, I am referring to Rocks comment…I think it was meant as a joke.

            As far as the subliminal mind games, I never said I believed in the mantra man=good, woman=bad…If you want to debate this issue, then think about the idea and concept of “original sin” and how this thought has affected and formed the opinions of people for centuries.

          • Branjor says:

            I know what you meant, MM. True, you can’t read body language, expressions, tone on a blog. However, I’ve read statements like that more than once from The Rock and he obviously likes that particular unfunny “joke.”
            You know something else? Whenever men are called out on sexism, all they have to do is sit back, put their feet up and the women who like them come to their defense. It literally *never* fails. And men know that.
            Agreed on original sin, MM. It has done enormous damage and even affects the opinions of people who don’t literally believe it. I didn’t say you believed in the mantra man=good, woman=bad, I’m sure you don’t. But it subliminally affects all of our minds, including mine, and it is toxic.

          • Branjor says:

            Speaking of reading people accurately, look at this cool test I found online. It tests your ability to read people’s emotions by their eyes.


            I had a lot of fun taking it.

          • purplefinn says:

            “You know something else? Whenever men are called out on sexism, all they have to do is sit back, put their feet up and the women who like them come to their defense. It literally *never* fails.”

            So well said. Thank you.

        • We could use a little levity in here… sadly JibJabObama is a much better dancer than the real O.

    • paper doll says:

      What I find offensive is Howard Finemann’s idea that being good must mean being male. Hillary is good : therefore a man. She’s an even bigger man than an actual man…AND he thinks this is a complement to her he that says so ..huh?. But Finemann must cut Hillary out of her womanhood if he is going to complement her because then those other wimmen might want a vital part too….to gain entrance into Finemann” serious” club house …you have to be male. But his actual goal is to shame Obama…by calling him a girl. Being a woman is the insult….again

      • Branjor says:

        Agreed, paperdoll, that is really offensive. I don’t read Finemann so I didn’t know he thought that.

        Another odd thing I’ve noticed consistently is that people often mix up the words “compliment” and “complement” when speaking of women and men. “Complement” is a sexist idea that women are supposed to act in ways that always reinforce exactly whatever the man is doing, i.e. if he pushes, she yields, that is, she “complements” him. Complement is also a blood protein, but we won’t get into that here. The word which you meant, paperdoll, was compliment, not complement.

  3. fiscalliberal says:

    This morning on Morning Joe, Jeffery Sachs said the government is being controlled by a Financial Oligarchy. Top 1% have more wealth than the bottom 90% are in charge.

    Oligarchy – A government run by only a few, often the wealthy

  4. Minkoff Minx says:

    Just thought I would post this:

    Holbrooke's Exit Strategy | The American Prospect

    “The ambassador’s last words underscore the fact that President Obama can’t come late to the Afghanistan debate.”

  5. Carolyn Kay says:

    >>Do Progressives Hate Rich People?

    Do the political and media establishment hate progressives?

    Carolyn Kay

    • bluelady says:

      I think the answer is yes.

      But a better question would be:

      Do Rich People Hate Anyone Who Has Less?

      Again, the answer is yes.

    • bostonboomer says:

      I don’t know about “progressives,” because they seem indistinguishable from Republicans. But the political and media establishment definitely hate poor people, working people, union members, and anything that could possible help any of those groups.

  6. TheRock says:

    Has John Stewart come around? At least his humor has which is more than I can say for Bill Maher….


    Hillary 2012

    (Note the big sister reference and the striking similarity to someone we know!)

    • Minkoff Minx says:

      Rock, I think these daily show videos will not embed…

      • dakinikat says:

        I just embedded the link to that episode. We’re discussing what to do about things right now about stuff like that.

        The discussion is this: Should use word press and move to a different blog hosting site?

        Should we just keep upgrading wordpress and live with some of the limitations?

        Oh, and also should we take ads to finance some of this?

        Input is appreciated!!! I can’t believe the admins are having this discussion but our traffic rating at Alexa is moving up there and so is our Technorati authority. We may be outgrowing the file cabinet zone already. Who knew?

  7. janicen says:

    Plenty to read and digest. Thanks for the great round-up, MM!

  8. bluelady says:

    As far as the demise of the Dem brand goes, I’m trying to come up with a new bumper sticker. How about:

    Obama- 2 years to resurrect Republicans
    Obama- another 2 to destroy Democrats

  9. Great roundup and nice find on that conversation piece about feminism.

    I think there are some self-defeating feminists yes, but I also, as an Indian American woman sometimes wonder about the rightwing’s obsession with brown damsels in distress. If they would put more emphasis on letting the women themselves speak up and out, that would be different, but it always feels so paternalistic to me. IMHO.

    • purplefinn says:

      Also from Glick’s article:

      The fact that the ladies in Philadelphia decided to take their stand against Israel and that Clinton and Obama attack Israel for building homes for Jews in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria while they all ignore the suffering of the women of Islam speaks volumes about the degradation of the West under the Left’s social and political leadership.

      Did she just call Obama a Socialist??

      I think she’s interested in balance and consistency and feminism is a side issue. I don’t care what she calls herself. I’m just glad we’re both “opposed to the oppression of women.” I call myself a feminist a la “Feminism is the radical notion that women are people.” ~Cheris Kramarae and Paula Treichler

  10. Look, it’s musical chairs (apologies if this is a retread on earlier Sky Dancing material, I’ve been a bit out of the loop the past few days):

    The Politico: Obama plans 2011 staff makeover President Barack Obama has delayed the most significant staff shuffle of his presidency until after New Year’s — but the changes may be more sweeping than anticipated and could include the hiring of high-profile Democrats defeated in the midterms.

  11. bostonboomer says:

    Terrific roundup, Minx! Lots of great links to browse through. Here’s what popped up on the NYT front page this morning: Two classified intelligence reports offer dim view of Afghan war

    • glennmcgahee says:

      How is the NY Times publishing classified Intelligence Reports any different from Wikileaks?

    • dakinikat says:

      They don’t call it the “graveyard of empires” for lack of evidence… And this is Obama’s “good” war

      • I always think of that Obama “stupid” war comment in light of Valerie Jarrett’s “Obama’s too talented to do what ordinary people do, he’s been bored his whole life” soliloquy.

        I guess he really meant he was against boring ordinary wars that actually have an end in sight? Perhaps an unfair transplanting of both quotes, but I just can’t help it. Bring our troops home.

    • Minkoff Minx says:

      Thanks for posting this link BB, that was very interesting…I’ve got to think about it before I comment on it.

  12. Pat Johnson says:

    Is anyone actually paying attention to Obama anymore? Just two years in and he has lost the support of most of the groups who endorsed him throughout the primaries based on the simple fact that he is not to be trusted. Saying one thing and doing the other is a sure way of discovering that when people take you at your word they are more than willing to walk away when you consistently let them down as often as he has.

    It will take a lot more than merely “shaking up his staff” to restore his relevancy when most of the Dem Party sees him as a weak sell out and a GOP enabler when faced with a more than hostile opposition party come January.

    I am unable to see where the Bush tax cuts extension is guaranteed to create more jobs when the fact is that most of our manufacturing base has gone overseas and if this number continues to rise, or at the least not appear much different come 2012, he will be “toast” at the ballot box while his presidency will go down as a marked failure.

  13. paper doll says:

    Funny when it’s asked if progressives hate rich people…most of the progressives I know are quite well off….! So the question could be do progressives hate themselves? I know the wealthy ones in my sphere do ! lol! They hate themselves as they make use of every advantage…but shedding a tear for those their money ( thankfully) insulate them from somehow makes it alright.

    as an Indian American woman sometimes wonder about the rightwing’s obsession with brown damsels in distress.

    Kind of like their obsession with the unborn rather than children? In that the fact they are obsessed with one, means they see that being as a lesser being ,….”needing ” their voice…. therefore: safe, silent and of use.

    If they would put more emphasis on letting the women themselves speak up and out, that would be different, but it always feels so paternalistic to me

    That’s cause it is…. and letting them not speak for themselves is the point I believe

    See what it took to get Obama to the State Dept? : A party.

    Nice round up!

    • glennmcgahee says:

      Its funny you caught the Obama attending a party at State. Thats right. Have you ever heard Obama praise Hillary and her hard work at a presser? I know there may have been too few of the press conferences for him to have gotten to it. So thats one excuse. Iimagine he would be sleeping on the couch if he did. Thats the other excuse.

  14. Pat Johnson says:

    They are expecting a vote today on DADT. My expectations are low in this one passing.

    Just waiting to see the reaction from President Indifferent with the outcome. My money is on the fact that he will signal his “disappointment” but will feel a sense of “relief” at the same time since deep inside he agrees with the fundies and he can easily point at the GOP for the failure to pass.

    But I have to admit to a small slice of optimism that lingers that perhaps, just this once, congress can put aside their differences and vote on a bill that would outlaw this discrimination once and for all.

    However, I will also admit to believing in Santa Claus until I was around 11 yrs old. Just goes to show just how dumb I am.

  15. Minkoff Minx says:

    Kids write Santa this year for basic needs instead of toys – So, kids wish list reflect the poor economy…this really hits home.

    There are more letters from unemployed parents asking for kids’ gifts they can’t afford, says Darlene Reid of New York City’s main post office.

    One mom sent a turn-off notice from the electric company, Fontana says. A single mother of a girl, 8, and a boy, 2, wrote that she recently lost her job. “I am unable to buy my children toys and clothes,” she said. “Santa may you help me with my family?”

    Tough times are shrinking the number of Secret Santas, Fontana says. Meanwhile, “the percentage of people who need help has increased,” says Mark Reynolds at the Postal Service’s Chicago district, and about half the letters won’t get answered.

    Melanney, 9, asked Santa for a coat and boots. “I have been a very good girl this year,” she wrote.

    How about those tax cuts for the wealthy…you think that they are going to donate or give some of that cash up to help the “little people?” No, that cash is going to be invested to make more money, and since the US economy sucks ass, the money will go to other countries that are building their economy…just like Dak says. Poor little girl Melanney…stuff like this just pisses me off.

  16. Minkoff Minx says:

    The tax cut bill just past in Senate…81 to 19…now lets see what the House will do.

  17. Minkoff Minx says:

    On the big lunch with CEOs:

    Deal may unleash corporate cash – John Maggs –

    Obama to push corporate America to increase hiring – Los Angeles Times

    Obama courts business to spur hiring | Reuters

    That last link to Reuters is the most recent…I also saw on CNN that GE and UBS CEOs are going to the “party”

    After hosting bank executives last year at the White House, Robert Wolf of UBS (UBS) was the only bank executive to make the cut.

    Tech companies were well represented, with Eric Schmidt of Google (GOOG, Fortune 500), John Chambers of Cisco Systems (CSCO, Fortune 500), Paul Otellini of Intel (INTC, Fortune 500) and Motorola’s (MOT, Fortune 500) Greg Brown all slated to attend.

    Also attending: John Doerr of Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, one of the leading venture capitalists in Silicon Valley.

    …Lew Hay of clean energy company NextEra Energy (NEE) was invited.
    Blue-chip firms were represented by Kenneth Chenault of American Express (AXP, Fortune 500), Jeffrey Immelt of General Electric (GE, Fortune 500), Ellen Kullman of DuPont (DD, Fortune 500) and James McNerney of Boeing (BA, Fortune 500).
    Rounding out the list are:

    Dave Cote, Honeywell International (HON, Fortune 500)
    Scott Davis, UPS (UPS, Fortune 500)
    Mark Gallogly, Centerbridge Partners
    John Lechleiter, Eli Lilly (LLY, Fortune 500)
    Indra Nooyi, PepsiCo (PEP, Fortune 500)
    Penny Pritzker, Pritzker Realty Group
    Brian Roberts, Comcast (CMCSA, Fortune 500)
    Jim Rogers, Duke Energy (DUK, Fortune 500)
    Obama to meet with 20 CEOs on economic issues – Dec. 15, 2010

  18. Minkoff Minx says:

    This is maddening, my family got zero help from Obama’s foreclosure relief plan. In fact, it looks like someone has bought our foreclosed house…for 55,000 bucks. So the BoA and Fannie Mae basturds will accept the 55,000 for a house that was 111,000 when originally built. And they would not help out my family when we wanted to lower our mortgage payments…It makes me sick…

    Geithner Blocking Legal Help For Foreclosure Victims

    WASHINGTON — Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has authorized big payouts to banks in an effort to encourage mortgage modifications, but is preventing borrowers in danger of losing their homes from accessing legal assistance under the Obama administration’s foreclosure relief plan — even when banks are wrongfully or fraudulently attempting evictions.

    • Woman Voter says:

      Boy, anything for Millionaires and Billionaires and they practically fall over each other trying to SAVE THE GREEDOS.

      The working people, they just don’t seem to count here, and especially women.

      BTW: MM, thank you for posting the Taylor Marsh article, very insightful.