Thom Hartmann: 'Thoughts On Freedom'

Source:Thom Hartmann hosting a discussion about freedom.

"Thom Takes calls from listeners/viewers who share what freedom means to them." 

From Thom Hartmann

CBPP: 'Mitt Romney Budget Proposals Would Necessitate Very Large Cuts in Medicaid, Education, Health Research & Other Programs

Source:Center For Budget & Policy Priorities with a look at Mitt Romney's budget plan.

"Governor Mitt Romney’s proposals to cap total federal spending at 20 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) and boost defense spending to 4 percent of GDP would require very large cuts in other programs, both entitlements and discretionary programs. 

This update of an earlier analysis is based on updated economic and budget projections that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) issued this summer and additional information that the Romney campaign has provided on his budget proposals.  The resulting estimates of the required budget cuts are somewhat smaller than the ones we released on May 21, but they are still very deep.

For the most part, Governor Romney has not outlined cuts in specific programs.  But if policy­makers repealed health reform (the Affordable Care Act, or ACA) and exempted Social Security from cuts, as Romney has suggested, and cut Medicare, Medicaid, and all other entitlement and discretionary programs by the same percentage to meet Romney’s overall spending cap and defense spending target, then they would have to cut non-defense programs other than Social Security by 22 percent in 2016 and 34 percent in 2022 (see Figure 1).  If they exempted Medicare from cuts for this period, the cuts in other programs would have to be even more dramatic — 32 percent in 2016 and 53 percent in 2022.

If they applied these cuts proportionately, the cuts in programs such as veterans’ disability compensation, Supplemental Security Income (SSI) for poor elderly and disabled individuals, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly food stamps), school lunches and other child nutrition programs, and unemployment compensation would cause the incomes of large numbers of households to fall below the poverty line.  Many who already are poor would become poorer.

The cuts in non­defense discretionary programs — a spending category that covers a wide variety of public services such as elemen­tary and secondary education, law enforcement, veterans’ health care, environmen­tal protection, and biomedical research — would come on top ofthe substantial cuts in this part of the budget that are already in law, due to the discretionary funding caps in last year’s Budget Control Act (BCA).  By 2022, the cuts under Governor Romney’s budget proposals would shrink nondefense discretionary spending — which, over the past 50 years, has averaged 3.9 percent of GDP and never fallen below 3.2 percent — to 1.8 percent of GDP if Medicare shares in the cuts, and to 1.3 percent of GDP if it does not.

These cuts would be noticeably deeper than those required under the austere House-passed budget plan authored by Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI).  (Romney’s nondefense cuts are deeper because his proposal increases core defense spending — the defense budget other than war costs and some relatively small items such as military family housing — to 4 percent of GDP, while the Ryan budget does not.)  Over the coming decade, Romney would require cuts in programs other than core defense of $6.1 trillion, compared with $5.0 trillion in cuts under the House-passed budget plan."

Source:Center For Budget & Policy Priorities

The Romney budget is essentially the Ryan budget. But the way to save the safety net, especially Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security and so- forth, is not by gutting them but making them real Welfare Insurance programs, only intended for the people who need them, self financed, so they don't put so much pressure on the rest of the Federal budget, including the national debt. And turning them over to the States to run, along with reforming the defense budget and tax code. There's the deficit vanishing and we can finally start paying down the national debt, once we obtain some real sustaining economic growth.

Lynn Stuart Parramore: 'Are You Ready For a Post Masculine World?'

Source:AlterNet columnist Lynn Stuart Parramore.

SourceThe Daily Journal 

"The sun began to set on traditional masculinity over 500 years ago – just around the time musketeers arrived on the battlefields of Europe. At first, the feudal knights scoffed. How unnatural, and worse, how unmanly to go around pointing ungainly, smoke-belching sticks at your enemies!

But soon enough, technology won out, and it was the knights who faded into obsolescence. Poets pined for the old masculinity, but the days when the brawniest ruled the land were numbered. Brains now counted. So did the ability to adapt to new technologies. Just ask Elizabeth I." 

From the AlterNet 

“There are a few things that happen when you attempt to travel the streets of New York with a bright yellow book that screams The End of Men under your arm. First, you get a lot of inquisitive stares. Some people snicker. When you accidentally leave the book on the counter of your morning coffee shop, the man who returns it to you points to the cover, giggles, and does a little jig.

But if you are the author of a book called The End of Men—with a man for a husband and a boy for a child—you get sticky notes left on your bedroom door. “My 6-year-old, to whom the book is dedicated, writes things like, ‘Only bullies write books called The End of Men,’” says author Hanna Rosin, whose 2010 Atlantic essay turned 310-page book hit stands this week. She clarifies: “He’s learning about bullying in school.”

Source:The Daily Beast- "It's not the end of men - but they're in trouble." From Hanna Rosin.

From The Daily Beast 

“Are we seeing an end of men and a rise of women? In our guest spot today Hanna Rosin author of The End of Men: And the Rise of Women, points out that women are no longer gaining on men they have pulled ahead of them. In her book she investigates the shifting power dynamics between men and women throughout every level of society and the implications it has on life events.

Check out an excerpt from The End of Men: And the Rise of Women and be sure to tune in at 3:40pm for the full conversation.

“Award-winning journalist Hanna Rosin argues that the transitional economy is ushering in a new era in gender relations, and explores how both men and women can adapt to our rapidly changing social and cultural dynamics.” 

Source:NBC News- Hanna Rosin's book.

From NBC News 

"Award-winning journalist Hanna Rosin argues that the transitional economy is ushering in a new era in gender relations, and explores how both men and women can adapt to our rapidly changing social and cultural dynamics." 

Source:The RSA- Hanna Rosin talking about her book.

From The RSA 

Warning: this article could be construed as politically incorrect by oversensitive tight asses. Actually, it probably will be.

Men, who needs them? A Far-Left pipe dream where men are not even welcome, or where masculinity disappears, or where all men are essentially gay. I find it ironic that people on the Far-Left who are so anti-male man-haters, tend to be somewhat dykish even and have masculine characteristics themselves. Even though they claim to be anti-masculinity. They see football, boxing, interest in cars, tools, gambling, checking out attractive women, and I could go on, but I have other things I would like to accomplish in my life, but they see all of these activities as somehow sexist. Even though a lot of American women, straight even, like football, boxing, cars, tools, gambling, etc and are some of the most feminine, beautiful and sexy women you’ll ever see.

It is not so much masculinity that the man-hating sexist Far-Left doesn’t like. Well, they don’t like masculinity, but it’s male masculinity and male heterosexuality that they don’t like. But if women are a Dyke, no problem, because she’s just being who she was born as. According to Socialists on the Far-Left who don’t like masculinity when it comes from straight men. 

You’ll never see straight men, or women who are to the right of Socialists, (democratic or otherwise) which is only most of the world, try to put down female femininity. Because we love women, especially straight women. At least coming from a straight man. We love who they are and how versatile that they are. That they’re cute, beautiful, well-built, funny, but they’ll also stand up for themselves and watch sports with the guys.

There are straight women who like sports and there are straight men such as myself, who like soap operas. If they’re funny, well-written, well-done and seem to have some broader point other than: "Who is Jake going to stab in the back now." Or whoever the character is. Without straight men and yes we tend to be masculine which is a common characteristic about straight men and something that straight women tend to like about us, we would have a country of gay men and overly adorable and feminine straight women who never grow up. We would be a national day care center and kindergarten class. With no one to fix the cars when they break down, police the streets, defend the country and so-forth. Because all the men would be makeup artists, or clothing designers. Well, I guess the dykes could handle the male responsibilities. It would be a strange universe where everyone who enters who use to live on Planet Earth would think they drank too much, or got too high the night before.