Here is the speech that President Obama gave in Ohio that just lays it on the line in very clear terms.
What we do right now will determine the path our country takes for the next four years.
It’s that simple.
What he didn’t say quite clearly enough for me is that not only must we put him back in office, but we must change Congress to remove the gridlock. If the American voters cannot make up their minds in a sufficiently clear way, then we will muddle through another 4 years of going almost nowhere.
If all of the rest of the world were as undecided as we are and were as feckless as we have been in the 2010 election, then we will all be making very little progress at about the same rate. Even though there are many countries who are as confused as we are, there are some who are not. We can commiserate with all the other countries falling to the back of the pack with us, while a few head to the front.
The decision is in our hands and the decision will have major consequences for our future. Let us hope that the American people are up to the challenge. This time around, it is not a foregone conclusion. There is a significant chance that we will fail to rise to the challenge this time. There will be nobody to blame but ourselves if we fail.
Let me be clear, in case you cannot deduce what I am saying about Congress. This country will not recover if we fail to send President Obama back to the White House. However, even if we re-elect President Obama, if we send Scott Brown back to the Senate, there still will not be any progress. Doing half the job as a voter just won’t cut it at this particularly hazardous moment in our history.
Here is the video of Elizabeth Warren’s June 13 appearance on Hardball with Chris Matthews.
I think she did a good job talking about the issues, but she did evade questions about why she isn’t doing better in the polls. I think she was right to focus on the issues rather than get into the game of inside politics.
I just hope that inside her political organization, they are thinking hard about the issues Matthews raised. It is obvious to me in seeing her in person at various events, that she is working her heart out. She is working so hard, I worry she is losing weight when she didn’t have any spare weight to lose in the first place. Working harder at what she is already doing is not the solution in this case. I am not sure any human being could work harder. So now is the time to look at working smarter.
When the campaign “professionals” cannot see that continuing to use the old “Elizabeth Warren for Massachusetts” slogan instead of the new “Elizabeth Warren for Senate” slogan, or the Deval Patrick phrase “Elizabeth Warren – Senator for All of Massachusetts” is doing unnecessary harm to the campaign and it would be trivial to fix it, you do have to wonder what they are up to.
The campaign headquarters still answers the phone “Elizabeth Warren for Massachusetts”. I asked them, “Why oh why do you still say that instead of ‘Elizabeth Warren for Senate'”. The person on the other end of the phone said he would pass my suggestion on. In parting he asked whether I really thought the new slogan would be better. I had all I could do to not reply, “Well, duh?” Instead, I explained that as I go around in the field and people ask me what she is running for, I have to wonder why the campaign isn’t doing more to put that question to bed. (Of course the signs, bumper stickers, and campaign paraphernalia I make myself all do say “Elizabeth Warren for Senate” or sometimes “Elizabeth Warren – Senator for Massachusetts”. The official signs from the campaign now do say “Elizabeth Warren for Senate”, so at least one faction in the campaign hierarchy gets it.)
When I get an appeal from “Elizabeth Warren for Massachusetts”, I have taken to replying that I would be happy to comply with resuests from “Elizabeth Warren for Senate”, but I no longer comply with anything asked of me from “Elizabeth Warren for Massachusetts”.
The Christian Science Monitor has the article Ron Barber’s win in Arizona House race a lift for dispirited Democrats.
Voters in former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords’ House district elected Ron Barber, the retired congresswoman’s aide, to serve out her term. Barber defeated a tea-party-backed candidate in a district where registered Republicans outnumber Democrats.
Of course the Republicans are claiming:
Congressman Sessions of the GOP campaign committee said “but Jesse ran a campaign focused on pro-growth policies that will lead to less government and a strong and vibrant economy.”
So if the Republicans have a pro-growth policy where was the strong and vibrant economy at the end of the previous Republican administration? How come the economy is doing so badly given that they have blocked almost every single initiative that Obama has wanted to try, and have even forced him to continue some of the disastrous tax policies from the previous 3 Republican administrations?
The Massachusetts Liberal blog has the post Brilliant diversion which makes the point:
And while Brown is anything but consistent between rhetoric and action, his campaign has shown it consistently thinks one or two moves ahead on the tactical chess board. Which brings us to the pay equality vote.
Though Elizabeth Warren’s latest ad is very good, I wonder shy she doesn’t make the more explicit points some place else that I made in my previous blog post, Senator Brown casts vote against wage bill:
The law “requiring employers to provide a reason for pay gaps when asked” doesn’t seem to be that onerous. If any of the supposed legitimate reasons mentioned by Republicans for a pay gap were the real reason, then all the employer would have to do is to say so. However, don’t you have to wonder why the Republicans think that there might be systematic differences in pay “based on performance”? Do they really think men do the job so much better than women that they merit a 30% wage differential?
Scott Brown claims to be working for all of Massachusetts, but he always finds a reason why a particular law to help the middle-class would be bad, and he never finds a reason why a particular law to help the wealthy would be bad. Is this sort of like Faux Noise’s “fair and balanced”?
Elizabeth Warren | Heart is the newest add by the Elizabeth Warren – Senator For Massachusetts Campaign.
As I look around and see all generations struggling with the way this country and economy have been turned up-side-down, I cannot imagine how the very people who are struggling would let the forces arrayed against them make them think this election is about anything but what Elizabeth Warren discusses here.
The Real News has the interview Did Social Over Spending Cause the Euro-Crisis?.
Carlo Panico: Most media pays no attention to scientific economic literature.
Follow the above link to see the transcript of the video below.
You have to listen to the interview very closely to get the point that the government misbehavior being discussed is in two parts. Most governments in Europe were following an agreed upon expansionary growth policy that lowered interest rates and encouraged spending (maybe too much in some places). At the same time, Germany took advantage of these other countries, by tightening the reins for internal spending in favor of getting an advantage over these other countries by exporting to them by undercutting their prices.
The Germany was very encouraging of the European Central Bank’s financing these countries to buy German exports. Now that Germany has sucked these countries dry, they are firmly against a continuation of the policy by the European Central Bank. For some reason, Germany is the major roadblock to solving the European crisis. I don’t know what Germany thinks it is going to gain in the long run by killing the economies of their major customers.
This last idea is something that just occurred to me, and is not part of the interview. Perhaps they are planning to buy up all the companies in these countries when those companies must sell themselves in distress sales.
You might pick up the these ideas more easily from the interview if you had seen some of my previous posts from The Real News. A few of these are listed below.
Elizabeth Warren arrives at 3 minutes 39 seconds into the video below.
She came to the Fins & Tales Restaurant in Southbridge, MA on May 12, 2012 to
an enthusiastic crowd of about 125 people.
After her remarks, she went around the room, as is her usual practice, and shook hands and spoke to almost everyone in the room. If she missed anybody, it was not for lack of trying.
You can see what a warm person she is, and how easily she establishes rapport with all who come within her range.
The video has some brief excerpts from Elizabeth Warren’s Democratic Party Convention speech.
Now I cannot remember if this was part of the pre-vote speech or of her acceptance speech.
Here is the link to the page where you can sign up or donate to the cause.