Category: Barack Obama

Just In Case You Wondered if Obama Didn’t Want to Gut Social Security

No Comments

Notice his shout out to Bob (Rubin) who wants to privatize Social Security

This is Obama at the opening meeting for the Wall Street driven “Hamilton Project”, and when he says, “too many of us have been interested in defending programs the way they were written in 1938, believing that if we admit the need to modernize these programs to fit changing times.”

Notice how he is enthusiastic about the idea of cutting Social Security.

He knows that it involves “throwing momma from the train,” so when he says, “This is not a bloodless process,” (7:56 in the vid) it ain’t his blood, or Bob Rubin’s blood that he is talking about.

This is not eleventy dimensional chess.  Obama sees gutting cutting Social Security as a potential bipartisan legacy.

This is what he wants.

H/t Naked Capitalism.

Judge Overturns Craven Obama Administration Morning After Pill Policy

No Comments

A while back, in yet another attempt to appease right wing Neanderthals who will never support him, the Obama Administration overruled its experts at the FDA, and limited access to the morning after pill.

Well, a Federal Judge just called the decision, arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable:

A federal judge on Friday ordered that the most common morning-after pill be made available over the counter for all ages, instead of requiring a prescription for girls 16 and younger. But his acidly worded decision raises a broader question about whether a cabinet secretary can decide on a drug’s availability for reasons other than its safety and effectiveness.

In his ruling, Judge Edward R. Korman of the Eastern District of New York accused the Obama administration of putting politics ahead of science. He concluded that the administration had not made its decisions based on scientific guidelines, and that its refusal to lift restrictions on access to the pill, Plan B One-Step, was “arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable.”

He said that when the Health and Human Services secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, countermanded a move by the Food and Drug Administration in 2011 to make the pill, which helps prevent pregnancy after sexual intercourse, universally available, “the secretary’s action was politically motivated, scientifically unjustified, and contrary to agency precedent.”

This is a very well deserved smack down.

Of all the bits of cowardice to come out of the Obama administration over the past few years, this was arguably the most heinous.

Obama is Not On Our Side

No Comments

After increasing signs that even rank and file Republicans oppose to cutting Social Security, but Barack Obama is determined to throw mama from the train:

President Obama next week will take the political risk of formally proposing cuts to Social Security and Medicare in his annual budget in an effort to demonstrate his willingness to compromise with Republicans and revive prospects for a long-term deficit-reduction deal, administration officials say.

In a significant shift in fiscal strategy, Mr. Obama on Wednesday will send a budget plan to Capitol Hill that departs from the usual presidential wish list that Republicans typically declare dead on arrival. Instead it will embody the final compromise offer that he made to Speaker John A. Boehner late last year, before Mr. Boehner abandoned negotiations in opposition to the president’s demand for higher taxes from wealthy individuals and some corporations.

 Congressional Republicans have dug in against any new tax revenues after higher taxes for the affluent were approved at the start of the year. The administration’s hope is to create cracks in Republicans’ antitax resistance, especially in the Senate, as constituents complain about the across-the-board cuts in military and domestic programs that took effect March 1.

 Mr. Obama’s proposed deficit reduction would replace those cuts. And if Republicans continue to resist the president, the White House believes that most Americans will blame them for the fiscal paralysis.

Yeah, and who is going to take the blame for gutting Social Security?

Seriously, when I have referred to him as the Manchurian Democrat, I was being prophetic.

He just flushed Democratic protection of Social Security down the f%$#ing toilet.

This is so contemptible MoveOn has gotten its hipster head out of its hipster ass and condemned his move without taking the time to set it up as a lame video contest:

“President Obama’s plan to cut Social Security would harm seniors who worked hard all their lives. Under this plan, a typical 80-year-old woman would lose the equivalent of three months worth of food every year. That’s unconscionable.

 It’s even more outrageous given that Republicans in Congress aren’t even asking for this Social Security cut. This time, the drive to cut Social Security is being led by President Obama and Democrats.

 Millions of MoveOn members did not work night and day to put President Obama into office so that he could propose policies that would hurt some of our most vulnerable people. Just as we fought and defeated President Bush’s plan to privatize Social Security, we will mobilize and stop this attempt to diminish the vital guarantee of Social Security. MoveOn’s 8 million members will not stand by and watch a Democratic President chip away at one of the most successful government programs of all time. Every member of Congress — Democrat or Republican — who votes for this proposal should expect to be held accountable.”

Call your Congresscritter, and tell them that you will do your best to have them primaried if they vote to support this.

Obamacare Hiccup ……… Is this the Shape of Things to Come

No Comments

The healthcare market for small business medical insurance mandated under the PPACA will be delayed:

Unable to meet tight deadlines in the new health care law, the Obama administration is delaying parts of a program intended to provide affordable health insurance to small businesses and their employees — a major selling point for the health care legislation.

The law calls for a new insurance marketplace specifically for small businesses, starting next year. But in most states, employers will not be able to get what Congress intended: the option to provide workers with a choice of health plans. They will instead be limited to a single plan.

The choice option, already available to many big businesses, was supposed to become available to small employers in January. But administration officials said they would delay it until 2015 in the 33 states where the federal government will be running insurance markets known as exchanges. And they will delay the requirement for other states as well.

The promise of affordable health insurance for small businesses was portrayed as a major advantage of the new health care law, mentioned often by White House officials and Democratic leaders in Congress as they fought opponents of the legislation.

Supporters of the law said they were disappointed by the turn of events.

………

D. Michael Roach, who owns a women’s clothing store in Portland, Ore., said the delay was “a real mistake.”

“It will limit the attractiveness of exchanges to small business,” he said. “We would like to see different insurance carriers available to each of our 12 employees, who range in age from 21 to 62. You would have more competition, more downward pressure on rates, and employees would be more likely to get exactly what they wanted.”

John C. Arensmeyer, the chief executive of Small Business Majority, an advocacy group, said that the delay of “employee choice” was “a major letdown for small business owners and their employees.”

Gee, the delay shafts small businesses, and favors the big players in the FIRE (Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate) sector.

Gee, that’s a surprise ……… Not.

The Obama administration doesn’t work hard for anything that does not have a payoff for the banksters and their ilk.

No Comments

The Obama administration is now claiming the right to assassinate citizens on US soil:

Yes, the president does have the authority to use military force against American citizens on US soil—but only in “an extraordinary circumstance,” Attorney General Eric Holder said in a letter to Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on Tuesday.

 “The US Attorney General’s refusal to rule out the possibility of drone strikes on American citizens and on American soil is more than frightening,” Paul said Tuesday. “It is an affront the constitutional due process rights of all Americans.”

 Last month, Paul threatened to filibuster the nomination of John Brennan, Obama’s pick to head the CIA, “until he answers the question of whether or not the president can kill American citizens through the drone strike program on US soil.” Tuesday, Brennan told Paul that “the agency I have been nominated to lead does not conduct lethal operations inside the United States—nor does it have any authority to do so.” Brennan said that the Justice Department would answer Paul’s question about whether Americans could be targeted for lethal strikes on US soil.

Worst ……… Constitutional ……… law ……… professor ……… ever.

You really should be horrified by this.

I am.

Tell Me That This Is Not a Bribe

No Comments

Jack Lew, Obama’s nominee for Treasury Secretary, appears to have a deal with his current employer, Citigroup, that looks an awful lot like a bribe:

Jack Lew is the nominee for Treasury secretary whose own bonus as an investment banker was bailed out by the Treasury Department when it rescued Citigroup Inc. (C) in 2008. He owes much to America’s taxpayers. He should also be grateful to Citigroup for agreeing to let him rejoin the government without suffering much for it financially.

An intriguing revelation from Lew’s Senate confirmation hearing last week was that he stood to be paid handsomely by Citigroup if he left the company for a top U.S. government job, under his 2006 employment agreement with the bank. The wording of the pay provisions made it seem, at least to me, as if Citigroup might have agreed to pay Lew some sort of a bounty to seek out, and be appointed to, such a position.

………

Lew’s employment agreement with Citigroup said his “guaranteed incentive and retention award” wouldn’t be paid if he quit his job, with limited exceptions. One was if he left Citigroup “as a result of your acceptance of a full-time high level position with the United States government or regulatory body.” This applied if he left “prior to the payment of any incentive and retention award for performance year 2008 or thereafter.” Such an award wasn’t guaranteed but would be consistent with the company’s practice, the document said.

A similar provision concerned his stock-based compensation. If Lew left in 2008 or afterward to accept a high-level U.S. government position, all of his outstanding equity awards, including restricted stock, would vest immediately, the document said. Alternatively, Citigroup had the option of paying Lew the cash equivalent of any shares he forfeited upon leaving. The terms didn’t mention other kinds of public-service work, such as a midlevel U.S. government job, a position in municipal or state government, or working at a nonprofit organization such as a university.

The payoff here is very clear: You go and work for the government, and you are our boy, bought and paid for.

First, the Cayman Islands accounts, and now this.

This guy is going to be an even bigger creature of the Wall Street banksters than than Geithner was.

This is deeply corrupt, in reality if not by law, but I think that the Obama administration sees this as a feature, not a bug.

When Charles F%$#ing Krauthammer is the Voice of Reason, You Have Jumped the Shark

No Comments
Jumping C. Megalodon*


This is one big shark that he jumped.
With Frikken Lasers!

The White House press corps(e) is mad as hell and they are not going to take it any more.

They have been stonewalled by the Obama administration for the last time?

What was it? The secret kill list? The use of the CIA and the NSA to spy on US citizens? The secret negotiations for the the Trans-Pacific Partnership?

Nope. The press is livid that they did not get a press availability when Obama played a round of golf with Tiger Woods:

The White House pushed back Tuesday against complaints from the press corps that the administration was too restrictive last weekend in denying reporters and photographers a glimpse of President Obama playing golf with Tiger Woods during his vacation in Florida.

 Press secretary Jay Carney said he sympathizes with the press corps’ bid for greater access, but he disputed suggestions that Obama has been more off-limits than his recent predecessors.

 Carney said Obama has held 35 news conferences in which reporters were permitted to ask questions, compared to 19 by George W. Bush to this point in his presidency. And Obama has granted 591 interviews, including 104 with television networks, Carney added.

 ………

 Later that afternoon, the White House confirmed that Woods was among Obama’s foursome after a reporter for Golf World Magazine and the Golf Channel had published the news on his Twitter feed hours earlier.

 After several reporters, including Fox News correspondent Ed Henry, president of the White House Correspondents’ Association, complained about the lack of access, Obama spoke with reporters aboard Air Force One on Monday evening on the way back to Washington. But that conversation was off the record.

Do you know how stupid this is?

It’s so stupid and over the top that lunatic and long distance psychotherapist Charles Krauthammer thinks that this is whiny inconsequential bullsh%$:

Charles Krauthammer is blasting the media for complaining about a lack of access to President Barack Obama over the weekend while he golfed with Tiger Woods, calling it “the biggest non-story” since the Kardashian weddings.

 “If the guy wants to play golf, the guy deserves a couple of days off. He wants privacy — big deal. This is the biggest non-story that the media have created since the Kardashian weddings,” Krauthammer said on Fox News on Monday. “I don’t understand what the story is and what the outrage is.”

Seriously, Charles Krauthammer is correct.

I cannot f%$#ing believe that I f%$#ing just f%$#ing said f%$#ing that.

*The largest shark, and likely largest predator fish ever. It died out some 1.5 million years ago. The Genus is still in dispute, between either Carcharodon (Great White) or Carcharocles (broad toothed Mako). But in either case, you are jumping C. Megalodon, you have jumped the biggest shark ever.

No, I Did Not Watch the State of the Union

No Comments

I just don’t like listening to him, so I read the official transcript.

Rather unsurprisingly, he wants to throw mama from the train put forward “entitlement reform”, and he is patting himself on the back about the successes Obamacare (time will tell, but I doubt it), and killing bin Laden.

He also waxes eloquent over lowering the deficit, because austerity has worked so well where it has been tried. (Not)

He also proposed infrastructure repair, but that’s not going to go anywhere.

I think that the most substantive proposal he made was to raise the minimum wage to $9.00/hour in stages through 2015.

As compared to his promise from the 2008 campaign, raising the minimum wage to $9.50 by 2011, this barely keeps up with inflation.

At least he is proposing an automatic inflation adjustment.

The real problem is that the minimum wage has plummeted relative to median and mean wages over the past 40 years

Source of data.

Based on this chart, it would appear that the minimum wage needs to increase by about 20% immediately to hit the trend (mid to upper 40% range), but the reality is that boosting the minimum wage has a big effect on boosting the lower half of the wage scale, so it probably needs to go up by about 40% to return to trend in the longer term.

Note also how the lines for median (50th percentile) and mean (average) have diverged.  This is an artifact of the increasingly inequality in our society.

I call this the “Bill Gates walked into the room, so we are now all millionaires” effect.  It makes the mean and the median diverge.

Setting the minimum wage to slowly, and automatically, converge to 45% of the minimum wage over the next half decade or so would serve to do a lot to reverse the income inequality .

George F%$# ing Will??!?!?!!?

No Comments

George Will is not just a partisan hack. He’s the guy who prepped Ronald Reagan for the 1980s debate while knowingly using Jimmy Carter’s stolen briefing books.

So, it is with some surprise that I note that he is calling for a breakup of the big banks:

With his chronically gravelly voice and relentlessly liberal agenda, Sherrod Brown seems to have stepped out of “Les Miserables,” hoarse from singing revolutionary anthems at the barricades. Today, Ohio’s senior senator has a project worthy of Victor Hugo — and of conservatives’ support. He wants to break up the biggest banks.

 He would advocate this even if he thought such banks would never have a crisis sufficient to threaten the financial system. He believes they are unhealthy for the financial system even when they are healthy. This is because there is a silent subsidy — an unfair competitive advantage relative to community banks — inherent in being deemed by the government, implicitly but clearly, too big to fail.

 The Senate has unanimously passed a bill offered by Brown and Sen. David Vitter, a Louisiana Republican, directing the Government Accountability Office to study whether banks with more than $500 billion in assets acquire an “economic benefit” because of their dangerous scale. Is their debt priced favorably because, being TBTF, they are considered especially creditworthy? Brown believes the 20 largest banks pay less when borrowing — 50 to 80 basis points less — than community banks must pay.

 In a sense, TBTF began under Ronald Reagan with the 1984 rescue of Continental Illinois, then the seventh-largest bank. In 2011, the four biggest U.S. banks (JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup and Wells Fargo) had 40 percent of all federally insured deposits. Today, the 5,500 community banks have 12 percent of the banking industry’s assets. The 12 banks with $250 billion to $2.3 trillion in assets total 69 percent. The 20 largest banks’ assets total 84.5 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product.

 ………

 By breaking up the biggest banks, conservatives will not be putting asunder what the free market has joined together. Government nurtured these behemoths by weaving an improvident safety net and by practicing crony capitalism. Dismantling them would be a blow against government that has become too big not to fail. Aux barricades!

(Emphasis original)

This is not what I expect from Will, and there is a part of me that is wondering whether this is more of a political tactic than a recognition of reality.

If the Republicans want an effective line of attack, they could do a lot worse than saying that Obama is determined to protect and defend the too big to fail banks.

It is something that would undermine any populist cred that Obama might seek to achieve, and as a bonus, it’s true.

So, either Will is late to this game, or he’s the the first volley in a Republican attack.

If I were a betting man, I’d call it even money.

Why I Call Him the Worst Constitutional Law Professor Ever.

No Comments

Just in case your wondering how bad Obama’s assertions of the right to kill anyone, at any time, are, note that not only are they dubious constitutionally, they directly conflict with the black letter text of the Magna Carta, meaning that he’s not just ignoring 230 years of law, he’s ignoring 798 years of law:

Two provisions of Magna Carta deserve our attention today, a gift to us from the Barons of 13th century England.

38. No bailiff for the future shall, upon his own unsupported complaint, put anyone to his “law”, without credible witnesses brought for this purposes. {This was replaced by improved legislation in 1863}

39. No freemen shall be taken or imprisoned or disseised {deprived of land} or exiled or in any way destroyed, nor will we go upon him nor send upon him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land. {This remains in force for the people of England, but no longer in the USA}

Our ancestors spent much blood, sweat, and tears between that day at Runnymede and the meeting in 1878 at Philadelphia. The liberties provided by the Constitution were won over those 30 generations, by the unruly Saxons and Normans of Medieval England — and the Founders, jealous of their liberties and willing to fight for them. In the decade since 9-11 we’ve thoughtlessly thrown away political structures that took centuries to build.

This country in general, and the Obama administration in general, is going in a profoundly wrong directions.

You Tell Them to Go Cheney Themselves

No Comments

Another Cave

Obama tries to split the baby again, offering a compromise on birth control:

The Obama administration proposed yet another compromise on Friday in an effort to address the concerns of religious organizations that object to its policy requiring health insurance plans to cover contraceptives for women at no charge.

 Kathleen Sebelius, the secretary of health and human services, said the proposal would guarantee free coverage of birth control “while respecting religious concerns.”

 Churches and religious organizations that object to providing birth control coverage on religious grounds would not have to pay for it.

 Under the proposal, female employees could get free birth control coverage through a separate plan that would be provided by a health insurer. The institution objecting to the coverage would not pay for the contraceptives. The costs would instead be paid by the insurance company, with the possibility of recouping the costs through lower health care expenses resulting in part from fewer births.

Obama does not get it.

The Catholic Church, and its Talibaptist allies, are want the right to enforce their religious beliefs on others.

This is all about a naked assertion of power, and the proper response is “F%$# You”, not fence mending.

The NRA are Contemptible Slime

No Comments

Yes, I know, and the sky is blue, but the just took out an ad going after Obama’s kids. I (for once) agree with WH spokesman Jay Carney:

Most Americans agree that a president’s children should not be used as pawns in a political fight. But to go so far as to make the safety of the President’s children the subject of an attack ad is repugnant and cowardly.

The NRA may be the most repulsive lobby in Washington.

A Big F%$# You to Torture Opponents

No Comments

After the idea got shot down by opponents of torture in 2009, Obama is nominating highly vocal torture supporter John Brennan:

President Obama plans to nominate top counter-terrorism advisor John Brennan to lead the CIA, a senior administration official said today.

Brennan, a 25-year veteran of the agency, would take the helm of the CIA in the wake of the resignation of former Army Gen. David Petraeus.

I will be calling my Senators (both Democrats) and asking that both of them to filibuster him. (they won’t, but I am asking)

It is very likely, though it is not certain given the veil of secrecy surrounding this matter that Brennan was an active participant in torture.

The most depressing commentary on this is Glen Greenwald’s observation that there is Obama has succeeded in making opposition to torture a fringe political position:

It is a perfect illustration of the Obama legacy that a person who was untouchable as CIA chief in 2008 because of his support for Bush’s most radical policies is not only Obama’s choice for the same position now, but will encounter very little resistance. Within this change one finds one of the most significant aspects of the Obama presidency: his conversion of what were once highly contentious right-wing policies into harmonious dogma of the DC bipartisan consensus. Then again, given how the CIA operates, one could fairly argue that Brennan’s eagerness to deceive and his long record of supporting radical and unaccountable powers make him the perfect person to run that agency. It seems clear that this is Obama’s calculus.

I can only conclude that Barack Obama, aka the Worst Constitutional Law Professor Ever™, is objectively pro torture.

And the morons in Sweden gave him a Nobel Peace Prize.

But of Course

No Comments

The very first person goes to jail over CIA torture, and it’s the whistle-blower:

Looking back, John C. Kiriakou admits he should have known better. But when the F.B.I. called him a year ago and invited him to stop by and “help us with a case,” he did not hesitate.

In his years as a C.I.A. operative, after all, Mr. Kiriakou had worked closely with F.B.I. agents overseas. Just months earlier, he had reported to the bureau a recruiting attempt by someone he believed to be an Asian spy.

“Anything for the F.B.I.,” Mr. Kiriakou replied.

Only an hour into what began as a relaxed chat with the two agents — the younger one who traded Pittsburgh Steelers talk with him and the senior investigator with the droopy eye — did he begin to realize just who was the target of their investigation.

Finally, the older agent leaned in close and said, by Mr. Kiriakou’s recollection, “In the interest of full disclosure, I should tell you that right now we’re executing a search warrant at your house and seizing your electronic devices.”

On Jan. 25, Mr. Kiriakou is scheduled to be sentenced to 30 months in prison as part of a plea deal in which he admitted violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act by e-mailing the name of a covert C.I.A. officer to a freelance reporter, who did not publish it. The law was passed in 1982, aimed at radical publications that deliberately sought to out undercover agents, exposing their secret work and endangering their lives.

In more than six decades of fraught interaction between the agency and the news media, John Kiriakou is the first current or former C.I.A. officer to be convicted of disclosing classified information to a reporter.

This is about scaring people out of being whistle-blowers.

This is about the “most open administration in history” doing its level best to create a completely secret and unaccountable executive.

This is why I call Barack Obama the worst constitutional law professor ever.

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, Richard Nixon was the worst president the US had from 1933 to 1973 1974, and the best president the US had from 1969 through 2013.

If that does not make you depressed, then I want whatever it is that you are smoking.

Republicans are Such Whiny Bitches

No Comments

John Boehner has said that that he will no longer negotiation with Barack Obama:

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) “is signaling that at least one thing will change about his leadership during the 113th Congress: he’s telling Republicans he is done with private, one-on-one negotiations with President Obama,” The Hill reports.

“During both 2011 and 2012, the Speaker spent weeks shuttling between the Capitol and the White House for meetings with the president in the hopes of striking a grand bargain on the deficit. Those efforts ended in failure, leaving Boehner feeling burned by Obama and, at times, isolated within his conference.”

So, Obama made him his bitch repeatedly, and now he’s running back to mommy.

A New Year, More Caving

No Comments

Your Obama Hat. Useful for Caving

Well, it’s not surprising.

New year, same old Obama. He caved, permanent tax cut, permanent reduction on the AMT, permanent reduction of the inheritance tax, and temporary continuation of extended unemployment benefits and a few other social programs, and 3 months on the debt ceiling.

Obama wants his grand bargain, where he guts Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, and he’ll continue to subvert his own bargaining position so that he can have granny eating cat food.*

*In the interest of health, I would suggest that people eat dog food, and not cat food. Cats because they are one of the few true carnivores, do not need the complex carbohydrates and fats that people, and dogs do. As such, dog food is better for you than cat food because it provides carbs and essential fatty acids. A dog can go blind if it is fed on cat food, but a cat lives just fine on dog food. The phenomenon is known as rabbit starvation.

Obama has lost………Markos Moulitsas Zúniga?!?!?!?

No Comments

As in “Kos” of Daily Kos, who is thoroughly unimpressed with Obama appearing to cede ground on core Democratic Party values:

If President Barack Obama has a flaw, it’s his obviously overwhelming desire to appear reasonable and conciliatory and “work together” to find “compromise” and “get things done”. Bipartisanly. With a sane, reasonable, conciliatory opposition, that approach would make sense. But after four years of getting slammed by Republicans eager to destroy his presidency, Obama still hasn’t learned the lesson. He still thinks he’s going to get rewarded for being the “adult in the room.” Yeah, everything I’ve put inside scare quotes is a joke. A bad, painful joke.

So there’s nothing better than headlines like this one, in the Washington Post, to deliver the lesson to the White House to, well, just quit being the Capitulator In Chief:

A rough 24 hours for the White House

You see, Obama had drawn a line in the sand, and then—to no one’s surprise—ended up capitulating on everything he said he’d never capitulate on.

While I think that Kos is entitled, and in fact justified in his disappointment, but I think that he is being naive about what is going on.

Barack Obama is not negotiating with himself, and he is not incompetent, he is getting exactly what he wants.

He is a conservative “Blue Dog in everything but name” Democrat; he is a Reagan revolution “Democrat” who thinks that our social safety net is too generous, and that taxes on the rich will destroy the economy.

Occam’s razor suggests that the simplest solution is usually the best.

You have two alternate theories.

The 1st theory is that Obama is unable to learn and he is a poor negotiator, but he went to Harvard Law, which is arguably one of the best training grounds for negotiation in the country, and was elected editor of the Harvard Law Review, which means that he had to out do the greatest legal minds of his generation.

The 2nd theory is that this is pretty much what Obama wants.

So, which theory seems simpler to you?

Obama Actually Takes a Stand on Michigan

No Comments

Unlike his hands off position in Wisconsin, Obama has actually come out against the Koch suckers’ right to work law in Michigan:

Union leaders warned that, if organized labor can be so battered in the union heartland of Michigan, it can—and may—be attacked anywhere. And the national significance of the move was highlighted by a statement from the Obama White House, which said:

President Obama has long opposed so-called “right-to-work” laws and he continues to oppose them now. The President believes our economy is stronger when workers get good wages and good benefits, and he opposes attempts to roll back their rights. Michigan—and its workers’ role in the revival of the US automobile industry—is a prime example of how unions have helped build a strong middle class and a strong American economy.

The problem is that following the 2010 debacle, Michigan is so f%$#ing Gerrymandered it’s not funny.

Another problem is that if there is a wave election that gives Democrats back control, the power brokers will ensure that too many of the Democrats will be faux Dems, and so repealing this will be put on the back burner.