[Marxism] Keith Olberman: "Into the streets"

Louis Proyect lnp3 at panix.com
Tue Aug 2 17:45:28 MDT 2011


Meanwhile, look at the crap that is coming from the Al Sharpton show 
that replaced Cenk Uygur on MSNBC.

Out of Sharpton's mouth last night:

But one of the things that bothers me is the tea party is also mad. So 
as some of us are angry about revenue, I`m a little worried about why 
are the tea party people angry. I don`t understand how we end up with a 
coalition with extremists on the right and people on the left that are 
calling themselves progressives.

Now, Dana [Milbank], a lot of the cuts also are back-loaded. A lot of 
them are not immediate. A lot of them are back-loaded. So when you look 
at discretionary spending cuts, there`s only 21 billion in 2012, so when 
people talk about how it will impact the economy, the immediate impact 
is not nearly as much as I thought it would be.

---

Out of the mouth of his guest Rep. Chaka Fattah:

So I think when we see the wisdom of this great young president in the 
afterglow of this deal, see in the aftermath, it might look a little 
dusty right now, but let`s get down to some of the details.

In this upcoming year, we`re going to be able to do more to respond to 
some of the challenges our people face. We have got 130 million people 
who are going to work. We can`t afford in our country to default, have 
our economy fall.

So you have to look at the entire package, in this package we are 
guaranteeing Pell Grants, billions of dollars so that young people can 
go to school. The tea party wanted to walk away from Boehner because 
they said, how could you guarantee Pell Grants for kids going to school?

---

Finally, an exchange between Sharpton and Valerie Jarrett, an aide to 
Barack Obama:

Joining me now, Valerie Jarrett, assistant to President Obama and White 
House senior adviser. Miss Jarrett, a lot of reaction behind the scenes 
I am sure, a lot of work we don`t know about. I want to show you a 
statement that I read early this morning, an editorial written by Paul 
Krugman in "The New York Times" said the president surrenders, 
"Republicans will supposedly have an incentive to make concessions the 
next time around because defense spending will be among the areas Cut, 
but the GOP has just demonstrated its willingness to risk financial 
collapse unless it gets everything its most extreme members want. Why 
expect it to be more reasonable next time? How do you respond to that? 
Did the president surrender, and are we going up a path that will lead 
to nothing?

VALERIE JARRETT, SENIOR ADVISOR TO THE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, 
good evening, Reverend Sharpton, it`s always a pleasure to be on your 
show. Of course not, the president made it very clear from the beginning 
that certain things had to happen. First, he was looking for certainty 
over a long term. We were able to get the debt ceiling lifted until 
2013. He did not want to end up in the middle of this debate again in 
six months. What we hear from businesses around the country, is they 
want certainty. This was providing a cloud over our economy. That cloud 
is gone. Secondly, the president said that if we are going to make very 
deep cuts, he wanted there to be balance and shared sacrifice, and he 
was prepared to do the grand bargain where we would have had substantial 
cuts and we would have also had revenue on the table. What we have right 
now is we have cuts in the first tranche, and we have the opportunity to 
bring revenues back into the equation to look at real tax reform where 
we get rid of these loopholes where, as you often said, the very wealthy 
are not paying their fair share, where we have subsidies to oil companies.

SHARPTON: So, revenues can come back into this process?

JARRETT: Absolutely.

SHARPTON: OK.

JARRETT: Absolutely, Reverend Sharpton, it`s a very important point. We 
now have the opportunity for this commission to look at all kinds of 
opportunities to bring down the deficit, including revenue. The other 
important point that the president made and will be contained in this 
bill if it is in fact passed, is he did not want to bring down the 
deficit on the backs of people who couldn`t afford it, senior citizens, 
disabled, poor, working families. We shouldn`t be making them pay for 
bringing down the deficit, and the fact that we have removed all of 
those very important safety net programs from the fire wall, from what 
we would have in case we default with this interim group, we have taken 
all those programs off the table.

SHARPTON: So, all of the programs that effect, the programs that affect 
the poor, the elderly, all are off the table, that`s not negotiable.

JARRETT: Those are completely out of the trigger. And that was very 
important to the president for all the reasons I said. So, is it a 
perfect deal? No, it is not. But what we are able to do with this is 
avert what would be a catastrophe for our country. And the fact that we 
are close to the edge here, it is something that never happened before 
in American history. We`ve never jeopardized our full faith and credit 
and our AAA rating. It`s so important that this bill is passed and that 
the president signs it, and, as he has said many times, of course it is 
not perfect, but it is good, it will going to be good for the country 
and we are very optimistic that it will get pass.





More information about the Marxism mailing list