This U.S. Senate Write-In Candidate in all 33 States Agrees, “Many Wealthy Americans Demand to be Coddled too Much.”

Why does the USA Chamber of Commerce and Some Multinational Corporations not like Clinton??? “Obama’s criticism of large companies for using tax breaks to ship jobs overseas. That’s it.”

By Kevin Stoda, an un-coddled American—and America’s write-in Candidate for Senator in 33 states.


I just came across a series of articles that explains simply why BIG-MONEYED Americans and Corporations are behaving anti-OBAMA and anti- Progressive or Anti-Democrat this 2010 mid-term election.


It is all simply because of “Obama’s criticism of large companies for using tax breaks to ship jobs overseas. That’s it.”


Two sets of publications have just come out reviewing why nearly 10 out of 10 big shots with the USA Chamber of Commerce and other Financial Heavyweights are throwing money against Obama supporters this election  Both say the same thing: “Obama’s criticism of large companies for using tax breaks to ship jobs overseas. That’s it.”


Don’t take my word for this data!  Read Kevin Drum’s article in MOTHER JONES from yesterday:


The article is entitled:  “DO THE RICH NEED CODDLING?

Drum begins by noting, “On a substantive front, after he took office Obama continued George Bush’s rescue of the banking system, boosted the economy by passing a stimulus bill, and saved untold thousands of businesses by rescuing GM and Chrysler. His healthcare reform bill was so business friendly it’s a wonder the industry didn’t keel over in hypoglycemic shock after it was passed. On the rhetorical front, he’s taken a few modest shots at the financial industry, but not much more. So what were they all so apoplectic about?”


It seems a paradox to many Americans that the wealthiest corporations cannot take criticism for moving jobs and corporate offices overseas time-and-again.  Why take all this money from the government and then try to vote it out of office by spending several billion dollars on key elections to undermine Obama?


The answer is obvious to Drum and me—THE RICH FEEL THEY NEED TO BE CODDLED AND TREATED AS ROYALTY, like the Bush family.


Drum concludes, “What’s remarkable about all this is that Obama is, patently, not anti-business. All of the corporate complaints above, when you dig an inch below the surface, amount to lashing out at phantasms. However, although Obama isn’t anti-business, it is fair to say that he’s not especially business friendly. And after decades of almost literally getting their every heart’s desire from Republican presidents and congresses, this has come as something as a shock to the corporate community. When Obama puts a tax break in the stimulus bill, it’s aimed mainly at the middle class, not the rich. When he hires a labor secretary, it’s someone who actually thinks labor laws should be enforced. When he says he wants to pass a healthcare reform bill, he actually does it. (Its impact on big business is close to zero, but no matter.) There’s no evidence at all that Obama wants to punish big business, but at the same time it’s quite plain that he cares much more about the middle class than he does about the rich.”

Drum adds, “And that’s pretty hard for them to take. So they’re apoplectic. On a scale of 1 to 10, he’s a ten. Merely refusing to coddle the business community endlessly is all it takes these days.”









About eslkevin

I am a peace educator who has taken time to teach and work in countries such as the USA, Germany, Japan, Nicaragua, Mexico, the UAE, Kuwait, Oman over the past 4 decades.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to This U.S. Senate Write-In Candidate in all 33 States Agrees, “Many Wealthy Americans Demand to be Coddled too Much.”

  1. eslkevin says:

    THE PROGRESS REPORT yesterday stated:

    An Extreme Makeover

    During the current campaign season, many Republican candidates have pushed to revive failed and unpopular policies from the GOP past, such as eliminating the Department of Education or privatizing Social Security. “We need to get back to transferring many of the powers of the federal government to the states,” said Alaska’s Republican Senate nominee Joe Miller, calling for the abolition of Social Security as we know it. “I’d start by eliminating the U.S. Department of Education at a cost of $50 billion and then move on to Housing and Urban Development,” said Utah Republican Senate nominee Mike Lee. Lee’s call was echoed by Nevada’s Republi can Senate nominee Sharron Angle, who said, “I would like to go through to the elimination. I think we start by defunding it, and the reason that we should eliminate it is because its not the federal government’s job to provide education for our children.” And these newcomers to the national political stage may find many sympathetic ears in the incumbent Congress, as the GOP’s shift to the right and embrace of the Tea Party has caused it to espouse an extreme anti-government zeal. These ideas — and others becoming part of the mainstream right wing, like ending the 14th amendment’s guarantee of birthright citizenship — highlight the extreme policy positions that have come to define the modern-day conservative movement and the candidates that it has adopted.

    PRIVATIZING SOCIAL SECURITY : In 2005, President George W. Bush attempted to privatize Social Security, but the effort fell flat in the face of wide public opposition. Bush now says his greatest failure was not privatizing Social Security, and many Republicans are attempting to succeed where Bush did not. According to a Center for American Progress Action Fund review, 104 Republicans in Congress have, at one point or another, supported privatizing Social Security. In all, 47 percent of House Republicans and 49 percent of Senate Republicans are on record in support of the idea. Many Republican candidates for the Senate — including Pat Toomey (PA), Ken Buck (CO), John Boozman (AR), and Rob Portman (OH) — have also proposed some form of privatization. This push comes despite the 2008 turmoil in the stock market, which would have cost an October 2008 retiree almost $30,000 in lost savings. In the end, creating private Social Security accounts would impose new risks on seniors , create new administrative costs and benefit reductions, and wouldn’t even set the Social Security system on a path to solvency. In fact, such a move would force the federal government into trillions of dollars of new borrowing, as money that should have gone into the general Social Security system gets diverted into the creation of personal accounts. This is an unnecessary risk, as more than 13 million seniors (and 20 million people in all ) are kept out of poverty only because of Social Security.

    ABOLISHING THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION : As recently as 1996, the Republican Party platform declared, “The Federal government has no constitutional authority to be involved in school curricula or to control jobs in the market place. This is why we will abolish the Department of Education.” However, multiple bills attempting to do so were stymied in Congress. As ThinkProgress’ Scott Keyes pointed out, “The last time the Republicans made a concerted effort to eliminate the Department of Education in 1995, they ran into a strong public backlash. Polling conducted by Hart Research Associates found that 80 percent of respondents in June 1995 wanted the Department of Education to be maintained, while just 17% wanted it eliminated.” And evidently not much has changed, as a new New York Times/CBS poll found that education funding is the last area in which respondents would like to see spending cuts. But that hasn’t stopped plenty of GOP candidates — 36 in all — from advocating for the Department’s abolition. And those candidates would find plenty of like-minded colleagues in Congress, as 75 incumbents have also supported the idea in the past. The Department of Education is currently responsible for the federal student loan program, Pell Grants, and education reform programs like the Teacher Incentive Fund and Race to the Top.

    ENDING BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP : In April, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), after previously working with Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) on crafting an immigration reform package, proposed that the 14th amendment’s guarantee of birthright citizenship should be overturned. “I’m looking at the laws that exist and see if it makes sense today,” Graham said. “Birthright citizenship doesn’t make so much sense when you understand the world as it is.” While Graham’s declaration was challenged by conservatives outside of Congress — Mark McKinnon, a former Republican adviser to President Bush, said, ” ;The 14th Amendment is a great legacy of the Republican party. It is a shame and an embarrassment that the GOP now wants to amend it for starkly political reasons” — Graham’s idea received a very different reception on Capitol Hill, with Sens. John McCain (R-AZ), Jon Kyl (R-AZ), and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) all saying Congress should at least hold hearings on the issue. In all, 130 Republicans in Congress want to consider ending the 14th amendment’s citizenship guarantee, which amounts to nearly 60 percent of the Republicans in Congress. As Keyes put it, “Ending birthright citizenship is no idle belief in the GOP caucus. Rather, Republicans have been pushing this idea for n early two decades, introducing 28 separate bills to eliminate birthright citizenship since 1995.”

    ABC News has received wide-ranging criticism for its decision to include “dishonest hatchet-man” Andrew Breitbart as part of its election night coverage. “This blindsided a good portion of the team here,” said an ABC source. “And not in a good way.” ABC has since clarified the decision, stressing that Breitbart is not affiliated with the network and that he will only appear on its website.

    Last Tuesday, the Fox Business Network devoted five hours of programming to a California ballot initiative, Proposition 24, which would repeal corporate tax breaks. The New York Times observes that during all the coverage, which overwhelmingly attacked Prop. 24, Fox Business Network never reported on one fact: its parent company, News Corp., spent $1.3 million to defeat the proposition.

    GOP House candidate Rich Iott, who drew fire after photos emerged of him wearing a Nazi uniform, refused to support House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) for Speaker Saturday. Boehner took significant flak for campaigning for Iott, but “moments after Boehner spoke” in Toledo on Iott’s behalf, Iott said, “I don’t know” about Boehner for Speaker.

    Top Republican advisers to the 2012 presidential contenders and veteran GOP operatives now have “a common, if uncoordinated, mission of halting the momentum and credibility” of Sarah Palin. Palin’s “intensely polarizing political style and often halting and superficial answers when pressed on policy” make GOP elites view the prospect of her 2012 nomination “a disaster in waiting.”

    Rep. Peter King (R-NY), the “top Republican on the House Committee on Homeland Security,” praised the Obama Administration for successfully stopping an attempted terrorist bombing revealed last week. “The administration handled it perfectly. I give them full credit,” said King during an appearance on CBS’s Face The Nation.

    According to the New York Times, the leaders of American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS, the secretive groups lead by Karl Rove and Ed Gillespie which have already spent millions of dollars in this election cycle, are already gearing up for the 2012 elections. They told major donors that they planned to be “even more effective” during the presidential elections.

    During an appearance on the Univision program “Al Punto,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) promised to bring the DREAM Act back for a vote in the lame-duck session. “We all support the DREAM Act. I just need a handful of Republicans to help me,” he told the station.

    The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals will hear Arizona’s appeal today of a lower-court ruling that blocked “the most-contested provisions” of SB1070 from taking effect. In July, the Obama administration succeeded in blocking provisions requiring police to check immigration status when stopping someone, allowing for warrantless arrests, and criminalizing failure of legal immigrants to carry registration papers.

    And finally: Ahead of his big rally in Washington on Saturday, D.C. Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton challenged Comedy Central host Stephen Colbert to drink the “Eleanor’s Revenge” — a cocktail served at a local bar that was named after Norton. Norton has an “ongoing feud with Colbert over his jokes about D.C.’s lack of voting rights” and said she would make sure the drink was “strong enough” for “some payback.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s