Republicans Care About Women?

Republicans lie, twist, and finagle, but we all know that, don't we?

From Prevention magazine

The following article was published last August at Townhall, but it just came to my attention today.   

Townhall was trying to pretend that Republicans really care about women by highlighting inflation in food prices since Obama took office.  Now how the Republicans would stop any food price inflation, of course, is not discussed.  Much of food price inflation comes from increases in the price of fuel and some of that comes from oil speculation.  I'm sure the Republicans will tell their deluded constituency that they will stop increases in oil prices by projects such as Keystone and open drilling on federal lands.. not to mention more deep water offshore drilling.   

By the way, food and beverage prices went up 28% during the Bush years, and food alone went up 29%.  I guess the writers at Townhall think that women are too stupid to look this stuff up on the Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index databases where it is readily available.

From the article:          

As I've noted before, the Obama campaign is trying hard to "reach out" to women -- especially the single affluent women (with false claims about the GOP's plans to take away contraception!) and single poor women (with class warfare rhetoric and the implicit promise of more government assistance). 

But for women who are really paying attention, this should raise some eyebrows: As the graphic below illustrates, grocery prices have risen 15% just since the start of President Obama's term.  And as the RNC points out (www.gop.com), if prices have risen this much in four years, what would they be after a second Obama term?

Kitchen table issues matter.  When lefties start spouting nonsense about Republicans wanting to take women back to the 1950's, point out better to return to the prosperous '50's than to the Depression-era 1930's, courtesy of Obamanomics.

My reply:  

There is really nothing false about the desire of many in the GOP to restrict access to contraception for many women, in particular, those who are less well-off who need free or low cost contraception the most.  "Defunding Planned Parenthood" is a battlecry throughout the Republican Party.

Now back to the article from Townhall, again, published back in August 2012:

At least "Julia" in the diagram may now have a job, which is more than she had after the Bush recession.

Our Republican friends appear to be playing with numbers, which isn't surprising. According to the chart, the bill for that grocery list went up 14% from some time "before" Obama. (The article doesn't appear to tell us what month they were looking at.) Now, inflation was actually DOWN from January 2009 until December 2010 and has been rising during the recovery over the last two years. 

How much has the index for "food at home" risen from January 2009 when Obama took office until August 2012, the date on which this article was published? According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, about 6%. So... It seems that the authors took a representative "grocery list" of items for which prices were going up faster than average to trash the Democrats. Not surprising.  (Under Bush, the "food at home" index rose 10% from January 2001 when Bush took office until August 2004.)

And, for women and families who are struggling financially, having an additional mouth to feed because of limitations in access to contraception is still a greater threat to their financial future than a 6% increase in the price of food.  

Again:  There is NOTHING in the article to suggest that the Republicans could actually do anything about inflation as a result of recovery... and inflated oil prices... (and they certainly did NOTHING about food inflation during the Bush years), but they really do count on stupidity to win them a few votes here and there. 

*************************************

For reference, here are the highlights for the Consumer Price Index report for February, which was just released Friday:

The Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) increased 0.7 percent in February on a seasonally adjusted basis, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Over the last 12 months, the all items index increased 2.0 percent before seasonal adjustment.

 

The gasoline index rose 9.1 percent in February to account for almost three-fourths of the seasonally adjusted all items increase. The indexes for electricity, natural gas, and fuel oil also increased, leading to a 5.4 percent rise in the energy index. 

The food index increased slightly in February, rising 0.1 percent.  

A sharp increase in the fruits and vegetables index was the major cause of the 0.1 percent increase in the food at home index, with other major grocery store food group indexes mixed.  

The index for all items less food and energy increased 0.2 percent in February. The indexes for shelter, used cars and trucks, recreation, and medical care all rose in February. These increases more than offset declines in the indexes for new vehicles, apparel, airline fares, and tobacco.  

The all items index increased 2.0 percent over the last 12 months compared to a 1.6 percent increase for the 12 months ending January. The index for all items less food and energy also increased 2.0 percent over the last 12 months. The energy index increased 2.3 percent and the food index rose 1.6 percent. 

You Can Never Have Too Much Hitler...Or You Might Get Trump.

The Hitler Channel

Updated March 14, 2016 after the recent events at rallies for Donald Trump.

Updated November 10, 2016:  We did get Trump.  Very horrifying.

Many people used to jokingly call The History Channel "The Hitler Channel" because it aired so many shows on various aspects of the Third Reich and on Germany under Hitler.  Lately the Hitler Channel has turned into another reality TV channel and the Hitler programs have moved to the American Military Channel.  

No matter though.. There are still plenty of shows on AMC about various aspects of the Third Reich, some new, some not so new. 

In the last couple of days, we've been watching some of those shows; some I've seen before, some I've never seen.  I used to think that there were so many shows about Hitler that it was simply ridiculous.  Enough with the Hitler stuff already, I would say to my husband.

But I've changed my mind.   

I really don't think that we can ever have too many shows on Hitler and the Third Reich.  I sometimes think that we should bombard our children with these shows (after they hit a certain age).  Required watching.  And I fear that as the years go by, too much of what happened in Germany will be watered down and/or forgotten.

Anne Frank

It Can't Happen Here?

Even though many of us want to think that the Third Reich is a thing of the past, something that we are too sophisticated to ever allow in the world again, all we need to do is to look around and realize that it could happen again; it could happen here or in another advanced, developed nation.

Hitler came to power on the back of economic catastrophe by blaming and spreading hate about one group of people and by elevating and extolling another group of people.  Then Hitler solidified his control by eliminating opposition, eliminating free speech, assembly, and a free press.  He also restored economic vitality to impoverished, struggling Germany by private-public partnerships that also relied on military build-up.  No two ways about it, the people of Germany loved Hitler in 1936 and 1937, and most (who weren't Jewish) didn't see the coming catastrophe until 1939 or 1940 at the earliest.

What Hitler Could Do That FDR, Obama and any other American President Could Not.

Because of political opposition, FDR could not do as much to restore economic vitality as quickly in the United States in the early 30's as Hitler did in Germany in the early 30's.  (And Obama, with intense, determined opposition, could not do as much as FDR.)  Hitler could also build prisons and crematoriums and use people as slave labor.  Though there is plenty of inequity here, we aren't anywhere close to that kind of evil.  At least not yet.

Growing up in the Echo Of World War II

Anyway, those of us who are Baby Boomers grew up in the echoes of the war, and we knew what Hitler did and we knew much about how he did it.  I remember waiting for a train at a railroad crossing near my house when I was 7 or 8 years old.  My mother told me about the boxcars full of Jewish people that Hitler shipped to their deaths in concentration camps.  I didn't understand how that could happen and I was very upset; so upset that I can distinctly remember the time and the place over 50 years later.  (The movie The Diary of Anne Frank came out right at that time, in 1959, when I was 7 going on 8.  Perhaps that is what inspired my mother's musings as we watched those freight cars roll by.)   

Do Kids Growing Up Today Really Understand What Happened in Germany in the 1930's and 1940's?

I'm not sure that people who grew up after the 60's really understand how evil and destructive Hitler was.  That's why I say that we really "can never have too much Hitler".  This era of history needs to be taught and retaught, and we need to sit our kids and grandkids down in front of the T.V. and talk about Hitler and the Third Reich with them.  Our kids need to know how and why this happened.  They can never forget.  We can't let them.   

What about today's adults?

And many adults need to know how and why this happened as well. Some of them have forgotten.  Some of them actually buy into the same kind of racism and ethnocentrism that polluted Germany.

Some of them support Donald Trump, who has made racism and xenophobia the cornerstones of his Presidential candidacy.  And his candidacy is encouraging people to suppress the opposition.  Now it just means escorting people out of his rallies to cheers accompanied by nasty comments by Trump.  But if Trump were elected?

I just came across this article at the Daily Kos, an account of two young people who decided to entertain themselves by attending a Trump rally.  From the article:

Once, after a protester was removed, Trump said, "Where are these people coming from? Who are they?" A lady, sitting not 5 feet from me, said, "Well hopefully when you're president, you'll get rid of em all!" Get rid of them? Get rid of anyone who opposes Trump? It was sickening. I felt truly nauseous. 

Somehow we have to stop this.

Voting Concerns in the U.S. Right Now: Shouldn't One Person Get One Vote?

We have many voting concerns in the country right now, including:

• Voter ID laws which disenfranchise thousands of people, many of them old and poor.  The most thorough article I've read on this can be found HERE at pro-Publica (Everything You've Wanted To Know About Voter ID Laws), "an independent, non-profit newsroom that produces investigative journalism in the public interest. "  A good column here by Ernest Dumas at the Arkansas Times:  "Pure GOP Meanness".  Don't miss this article at the ACLU website:  "Voter Suppression in America".
• Changes in hours of early voting which disenfranchise thousands of people due to long lines and excessive wait times, sometimes exceeding 4-5 hours.  A few links for people who can't quite remember what happened November 5th:  Long Lines Suggest a Need For Voting Reform (Opinion piece at the Washington Post); Andrew Cohen at the Atlantic: No One Should Have to Wait 7 Hours to Vote; and this article about long lines in the Washington D.C. area.  Meanwhile, just to be fair and balanced, here's an article from the conservative Heritage.org which believes that complaints of long voter lines are overblown.  (No, Heritage.org, most of us didn't have to wait more than fifteen minutes to an hour. But that doesn't mean that long voting lines are not a problem!) 
• Gerrymandering of Congressional districts, particularly in states controlled by Republicans.  Here's a good article with a link to a Republican State Leadership Committee report that bragged about how the gerrymandering worked.  Another Washington Post opinion piece on the issue HERE.  Two other articles on this, this one from the LATimes (Short of Voters, the Republicans Gerrymander Their Way Back to Power), and this lament at Salon.com:  The House GOP Can't Be Beat. It's Worse Than Gerrymandering, which does talk about why the problem may be worse than simple gerrymandering.  
• Rigging of the Electoral College system in states now controlled by Republicans which voted Democratic in 2012.  So many good articles on this mess:  Mother Jones: "GOP's Plan to Rig the Electoral College Explained"; The Atlantic: GOP's Plan To Take the Electoral Vote Rigging Scheme National;  also at The Atlantic:  How To Win States and Disenfranchise People.  Thom Hartmann presents a strategy to deal with this HERE at Truth-Out.  Google "Republicans rigging the electoral college" for many more articles on this,particularly for information on the various states. 
• A challenge to the Voting Rights Act (brought by Republican interest groups) which may result in less federal oversight of elections in states and counties that have traditionally disenfranchised minorities.  Here's a good summary of that at NPR.
• ONE older lady in Ohio who claims to have voted twice and perhaps voted more than that.. who IS being investigated for voter fraud.  

Now.. Which of these situations, which of these affronts to our democratic national principle of one person/one vote, are getting the most press and the most concern from Republicans and other right wingers? 

You get three guesses and the first two don't count.

(You can find information on the woman in Ohio all over the right wing Internet sites.. Just do a search on "Ohio woman voted six times".)   

No, people, Both Parties Are NOT the Same! 

Conservatives are Soooooo Superior.... and You're Not!

I'm perfect in every way.. and YOU are just a bum...one of those "takers"!

Ducks in a Row (from Sophyta's blog)

Sparring with right wingers may not be the best use of my time ...  I hear many of the same things over and over again.  But there are just a few different tenets underlying right-wing (usually conservative and/or Republican) thinking.  Here is one of the biggies:  

• If "those people" just "worked harder", "planned ahead", or "made good choices", then they wouldn't need any kind of assistance/would have enough saved for retirement/wouldn't be poor/wouldn't be sick...on and on, bla bla bla, whatever.

But really people.. are we all so superior and so sure of ourselves? 

Look, I KNOW families who THOUGHT they had all their retirement ducks in a row by the time they were 50 who wound up in difficult financial straits or foreclosure.. One guy I know was even homeless for awhile.  This happened to one family I know BEFORE the economic collapse of 2008.

Here are the kinds of things that can happen (even without an economic collapse thrown in) that can cause hardship for people who DID plan ahead, who DID save enough, who DID work hard, who DID get an education.  Few of us are immune from or have enough insurance of varying types to weather these storms... unless we have very wealthy families behind us.

1.  After a job layoff after 50, a man invested some of his money into a business and lived off of the spouse's salary... The business went bad and the company the spouse worked for went belly up a few years later.  (I'm tired of reading that people who are laid off should "start their own businesses".  If the person can do it, fine, but businesses generally require capital and MOST businesses go belly up in the first two years... taking that needed nest egg with them.)

2.  A late in life divorce.. Splitting assets when you are 50 doesn't help your financial situation at all.  But if your spouse has started to wig out in terms of drinking, gambling, perhaps not working, being abusive, chasing other men/women-- and refuses to get help.. what are you supposed to do?   

3.  Health problems in one or the other partner or one of the kids; that is, serious physical or mental health problems.  I know families who spent sums in the tens of thousands of dollars, perhaps as much as a hundred thousand, trying to get a teenaged or young adult kid straightened out... Special schools, rehab facilities, kiddie prisons, you name it.  Physical diseases can be just as taxing and as expensive. 

4.  Disability in the primary worker.  After an accident or a disease, he/she may be tossed out of his job or simply can't work.  It takes two years for disability (SSDI) to go through these days and, IF and when you finally get disability, those $1400 payments (if you are lucky to get that much) don't go far.

5.  A natural disaster in your home.  Anyone who thinks that adequate insurance, FEMA, and flood insurance will put everything back in order hasn't lived through a massive natural disaster.  And you may not know this:  You can move into a house that is NOT in a flood zone.. and find out some years later that your home has been reclassified into a flood zone!  Oh, happy day!

6.  Having kids late in life.  If you have kids in your 30's, they aren't out of the house until you are in your 50's.  Many people plan on working for 10-15 years after the kids are gone to refeather the retirement nest.  And then.. health problems, a lost job, a lost business.  And there they are, 62, no job, no retirement savings.  

There But For the Grace of God...

If one of these things hasn't happened to someone before they retire, Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal, they need to get down on their knees and thank the Lord, the Great Spirit, or the Goddess Athena herself.

And I know really know families who have somehow been saddled with MANY of these situations, particularly in this Great Recession.

And If You Lack Compassion..

Now to those characters who simply lack compassion, empathy, common sense or all three:  I hate to wish a calamity on anyone...  But if you have ever bragged about how superior you are to someone who needs help...  I DO wish a calamity upon you.  May an uninsured rusty pick up truck cross your path...leaving you with no time to jump out of the way.

.  

More...Just as I was writing this, I came upon this link from cracked.com:  Four Things Politicians Will Never Understand About Poor People.  I personally believe that this is a much bigger problem on the Republican side of the aisle (because I do NOT believe that "Both parties are the same"), but I do agree that many people who have never themselves experienced hardship have a hard time really understanding what it is like to sit on your fence (because you couldn't get the gate open fast enough) and beg the electric company to not turn off your electricity because you had gone down there the day before with a deposit (that you borrowed from a relative) and made a payment plan.  

And I wrote this last year, profiles of several families and people that I know who are struggling:  What Is Unemployment and Poverty in America?  Now, some of the people profiled in that series have improved their situations, but many are still struggling.  

Where's the outrage: Watermelon in Montana?

This is what passes for humor in the Montana GOP:

Hardee har har.

Now, Jennifer Olsen didn't make this up this hilarity.  She just shared something on Facebook made up by some true comic talent (yes, sarcasm) named Rich Diamond.  But no one is talking about good old Rich.  You see, Jennifer Olsen is a Tea Party person in Montana.  O.K., you might expect the above from a Tea Party person anywhere in the United States.

But that's not the big problem here:  She's also the county GOP chairperson in Yellowstone County, Montana.  That's right; she's an official representative of the Republican party in addition to being a Tea Party person.

Meteor Blades at the Daily Kos captures the story of the above Facebook post beautifully:

It speaks volumes that the head honcho of the GOP in Montana's most populous county and home of its largest city would think the Obama-trap photo is a big ha-ha. But then as has become obvious over the past four years, it's not just in Big Sky country that modern Republicans, and not all of them tea partiers, have chosen to treat the president like some uppity darkie who has no business entering the White House other than through the deliveries door.

The story at the Montanafesto about Racism and Republicans in Montana in general and Jennifer Olsen and her family in particular, makes this point:

Thanks to the first amendment, Americans are able to think whatever they would like as well as express those thoughts, but such expression does (have) consequences.  I discourage Yellowstone County Republican precinct chairs and legislators from turning a blind eye to this blatantly racist post.  If Ms Olsen is not held responsible for her actions, we send a message that this behavior is acceptable and perhaps these views are even condoned by the GOP.  The Republican Party was founded on abolishing slavery.  Why do we now tolerate our leaders advocating bigotry in a public forum? Bigotry is rooted in ignorance and the Republican Party should purge this cancer from the party.  Shame on you, Jennifer Olsen.  You are a disgrace to your party, to the central committee you chair,  to Montana, and to America.

Well, yeah, writer at the Montanafesto:  Of course you are correct.  The problem is that this behavior probably IS acceptable and these views probably ARE condoned by the current GOP. 

"This is what passes for humor in the Montana GOP."

And yet people out there claim that "Both Parties Are the Same" and the differences between them are spurious.  But really.. When is the last time a Democrat put out some kind of racist "fun" thing like this?  Of course Democrats take jabs at Republicans.. but blatant racism?  Find me some examples of Democrats mocking black public officials by talking about watermelons or making other racist slurs!

Most important:  When have we heard any Republican elected officials at either the state or local levels condemn the racists who do this kind of stuff?  

And then, people who proclaim that "Both Parties Are The Same", try to tell me that it doesn't matter that the racists find a home in the GOP whereas racists do not find that kind of home among the Democrats.  Tell me that racism and tolerance of racism is just not important.

A Republican Party With a Heart and a Brain

Meteor Blades at the Daily Kos sums this up better than I can:

A Republican Party with a heart and a brain and a sense of honor would have immediately booted Olsen out of her county post and offered Montanans and the President an apology. But then a Republican Party with a heart and a brain and a sense of honor wouldn't be the Republican Party.

The Republican War on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

If "both parties are the same", why are the Republicans trying to destroy the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau?

From Represent.us' Facebook page.

Let's make this very clear: 

It isn't the Democrats or Obama who are trying to destroy or handcuff this new agency- It's the Republicans.

A recent editorial at the New York Times makes this abundantly clear  as it lists three big accomplishments of the CFPB in its first 18 months:

• It called a halt to predatory practices by mortgage lenders, ensuring that borrowers are not saddled with loans they can’t afford and preventing brokers from earning higher commissions for higher interest rates.

• It won an $85 million settlement from American Express, which it accused of deceptive and discriminatory marketing and billing practices.

• It opened an investigation into questionable marketing practices by banks and credit card companies on college campuses, which often take place after undisclosed financial arrangements are made with universities.

The Republicans are fighting the recess appointment of Richard Cordroy as Director tooth and nail in any way possible, including through the federal courts.

Here's a disturbing passage from the editorial:

The consumer bureau has taken seriously its mandate to protect the public from the kinds of abuses that helped lead to the 2009 recession, and it has not been intimidated by the financial industry’s army of lobbyists. That’s what worries Republicans. They can’t prevent the bureau from regulating their financial supporters. Having failed to block the creation of the bureau in the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform bill, they are now trying to take away its power by filibuster, and they may well succeed. 

Let's Face It:  The Republicans Don't Want Consumer Protection
Back on February 1st, a cabal of 43 REPUBLICAN Senators complained to the President and vowed to block the appointment of anybody as Director unless their demands to basically strip the agency of its powers were  met.  The agency can't do much of anything without a functioning Director.    (Click the link in this paragraph or the link under the blue photo at the top of the article for more information).

Remember that Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts set up the agency and it was hoped that she would be named Director.  But the Democrats knew that the Republicans would never confirm her as the Director of the agency, so they nominated Cordroy, her able lieutenant and the Ohio Attorney General.  But the Republicans in their letter make it clear that they are "concerned" about the lack of "Congressional oversight" and lack of "normal Democratic controls" over its Director.  In other words, they do not want this agency to have any real authority.. They want it to be under the purview of Congress, despite the fact that most other executive department agencies do NOT answer to Congress, but to the Chief Executive, the President.  

Both Parties are NOT the Same!

Let me make that clear to anybody out there who thinks that "Both parties are the same" or that the "Democrats are in the pockets of the banks just as the Republicans are" or any other similar stupidity:  It's the REPUBLICANS who are blocking the effective functioning of this agency, not the Democrats.  No, the Democrats are not perfect-- but they AREN'T Republicans! 

Follow the Money

Now... let's just see where the money for these Republicans is coming from.  The first two signatories to this letter from the Gang of 43 are (surprise, surprise), Mitch McConnell, Republican Senator from Kentucky, and Mike Crapo, Republican Senator from Idaho.

The top industry donating to McConnell in 2007 through 2012?  Surprise, surprise again!  "Securities and investments" which contributed 1.6 million to McConnell.  according to Open Secrets.  And the top industry donating to Crapo in 2007 through 2012?  Surprise again:  Securities and Investments, which contributed a mere $400,000 to Crapo.  To be fair, Securities and investments (or the employees of securities and investments firms or PACs) contribute to almost every candidate, Republican and Democrat.

But still....The representatives and employees of Securities and investment interests started giving more and more money to Republicans when they decided that they didn't like the regulations that Democrats were increasingly proposing and enacting in 2009 and 2010.

Nope, boys and girls, the two parties are NOT the same, they are NOT both "puppets" of Wall Street, and don't let anybody convince you that they are.

Please check out the comments section as I will add comments, both pro and con, about this situation in the days and weeks to come.


******************************************************

Updates and links from Represent.Us on Facebook:

Public Campaign.org:  Senators Pledging to Block Wall Street Watchdog Have Received $143 Million Financial Industry Cash:

"The 43 U.S. Senators who signed a letter to President Barack Obama pledging to block Richard Cordray’s re-appointment to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) have received nearly $143 million in campaign contributions from the finance, insurance, and real estate sector—those who’d benefit the most from a weakened CFPB."

The Hill: Senate Republicans Renew Blockade of Obama's Consumer Protection Pick 

 "The CFPB as created by the deeply flawed Dodd-Frank Act is one of the least accountable in Washington," said McConnell. "Today’s letter reaffirms a commitment by 43 Senators to fix the poorly thought structure of this agency that has unprecedented reach and control over individual consumer decisions — but an unprecedented lack of oversight and accountability.”...

"The American people need Richard to keep standing up for them," the president said when he made the pick. "And there’s absolutely no excuse for the Senate to wait any longer to confirm him." 

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Johnson (D-S.D.) dismissed the latest GOP pronouncement as "just politics at play." 

"The CFPB enjoys overwhelming public support, and there is no evidence that the bureau is unaccountable and that structural changes are necessary," Johnson said. "The market needs certainty, and blocking Richard Cordray's nomination is a disservice to consumers and industry alike."

How Much Did Other Senators Get From Wall Street?

From a reader:  I want to know how much Wall Street gave the other 57 senators.

I use Open Secrets to check campaign contributions:  Who is contributing what to whom.  But read carefully.  Remember that when names of companies are listed, it is actually employees of those companies that are contributing, not the companies themselves.

Stop Whining And Start Working on 2014!

A last-minute deal to avert the fiscal cliff was put together and passed by the Senate last night, with Joe Biden running the football for the Democrats and Mitch McConnell holding court for the Republicans.

Update January 2nd, 1 a.m.:  The House passed this law Tuesday night and it has been signed into law by President Obama.      

Found at Bloomberg Businessweek

Another Smelly Compromise:        

As it is a smelly compromise; many people do not like it.  It does some good things and some mediocre things:

• As the Bush tax cuts ended yesterday, it restores those tax cuts for people with individual incomes under $400,000 or family incomes under $450,000.  This is better than what the Republicans wanted, which was a permanent extension of all Bush tax cuts, but not as good as what the Democrats wanted, which was permanent extensions of the tax cuts only for people with individual incomes under $200,000 or family incomes under $250,000.  (However, people with incomes above $250,000 have lost some of their exemptions, so they will be paying more taxes anyway.)  
• A one-year extension of unemployment benefit extensions, discussed HERE and HERE.
  This does not extend unemployment benefits for people who have already exhausted their benefits in 2012; it simply makes those same extensions available to people who got laid off in late 2011 or in 2012.
• I've read that there is a provision to prevent decreases in farm subsidies which was threatening to raise the cost of milk substantially.
• The first five million of estates will be exempted from taxes; after that, estates will be taxed at 40%.  I personally would have preferred an exemption of the first two to three million.  Many middle class working  (vs. uber wealthy) families do manage to leave estates of two to three million to their kids and heirs.
• Increases on capital gains taxes.  I can't find the summary, but the capital gains tax will jump to 20% (still not high enough) for people with over $200,000 income. 
• The Payroll tax cut is gone.  I would have preferred to see a two-step elimination of this tax cut so that the average $50,000 worker would see only a $10/week decrease in their take home pay this year and another $10/week decrease next year vs. a $20/week decrease in one fell swoop.  (But I'm not in Congress.)
• Several other stimulus tax credits, the Earned Income Credit and the Child Tax Credit among them, survived.  
• This is not a full summary; just a summary of the most discussed parts of this compromise. 

Let's remember that without this smelly compromise, the average American working class or middle class family, perhaps as many as 80 to 100 million American families, would have been paying AT LEAST $40 to $100 a week more in withholding for federal income taxes (due to the end of the Bush tax cuts and the end of various tax credits) and increased FICA taxes, and over two million American families will be without unemployment insurance extensions.  These are big hits.  How many middle or working class families can afford an extra $200 a month or more in taxes?  How will two million families without $1200 or more a month in unemployment benefits keep the heat on and keep food on their tables? 

Stop Whining and Start Working!

If you are fuming right now and posting "Obama and the Democrats caved!" all over the Internet, remember one thing:  The Republicans won the House of Representatives in November.  

Until we get them out of power (and we have changes to the filibuster rule in the Senate), these are the kinds of compromises that we are going to get:  They involve payoffs to the rich guys just so that the middle class can hang on to something.  I'm disgusted as well, but I see it for what it is.  No, the Democrats do NOT hold all of the cards, and if you think they do, you are living in la-la land somewhere.  

Unless there is one party in absolute power who puts the welfare of the middle and working classes above the welfare of the rich, OR two parties who both put the welfare of the middle and working classes above the welfare of the rich,  we can look forward to many more situations in which the welfare of the middle and working classes are beholden to stinky compromises.  

If you don't like the way things are now (and I don't), the best answer is this:  The Republicans must go.  Only then can we contemplate more progressive solutions to the problems of this country.  

2014 needs to start NOW!