Wednesday Mashup (10/6/10)

I give you the following from Baby Newton Leroy Gingrich here…

"This year, the House Republican's Pledge to America has set the stage for a powerful, symbolic closing argument for candidates seeking to unseat the left-wing, big spending, job killing Democrats: paychecks versus food stamps," Gingrich wrote in a memo.

The potential 2012 presidential candidate outlined the job losses suffered during the past four years while Democrats controlled Congress and have had President Obama in the White House the past two. He contrasted that with the jobs created during the 1990s, when Republicans controlled Congress and Democratic President Bill Clinton was in the White House.

It would be funny if it weren’t so pathetic (I don’t know how much credit Gingrich and the congressional Repugs deserve for the prosperity this country experienced in the ‘90s versus that properly owed to President Clinton, but I know that, at a minimum, Gingrich was responsible for this – and God help us if his party ever gets the chance to try it again).

Meanwhile, the New York Times tells us the following here…

A decade ago, New York City officials were so reluctant to give out food stamps, they made people register one day and return the next just to get an application. The welfare commissioner said the program caused dependency and the poor were “better off” without it.

Now the city urges the needy to seek aid (in languages from Albanian to Yiddish). Neighborhood groups recruit clients at churches and grocery stores, with materials that all but proclaim a civic duty to apply — to “help New York farmers, grocers, and businesses.” There is even a program on Rikers Island to enroll inmates leaving the jail.

“Applying for food stamps is easier than ever,” city posters say.

The same is true nationwide. After a U-turn in the politics of poverty, food stamps, a program once scorned as “welfare,” enjoys broad new support. Following deep cuts in the 1990s, Congress reversed course to expand eligibility, cut red tape and burnish the program’s image, with a special effort to enroll the working poor. These changes, combined with soaring unemployment, have pushed enrollment to record highs, with one in eight Americans now getting aid.

“I’ve seen a remarkable shift,” said Senator Richard G. Lugar, an Indiana Republican and prominent food stamp supporter. “People now see that it’s necessary to have a strong food stamp program.”

And by the way, Newt, I’m still waiting for details on that space-based air traffic control system you opined about here.

Next, Darrell Issa is back with more demagoguery (here)…

While millions of Americans struggle to find work, the federal civilian workforce has prospered. Federal employees’ salaries and benefits have spiked over the past decade. In fact, their compensation advantage over workers in the private sector has grown since 2000 from about $24,000 to almost $51,000.

In response, I give you Media Matters here…

Why is this a misleading comparison? For starters, as USA Today explained in its article: "Public employee unions say the compensation gap reflects the increasingly high level of skill and education required for most federal jobs and the government contracting out lower-paid jobs to the private sector in recent years." The article further quotes Colleen Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union, as saying, "The data are not useful for a direct public-private pay comparison."

Back in March, in response to a similar USA Today analysis, then-White House OMB director Peter Orszag explained why accounting for these differences in skill level and education between the federal and private workforces is crucial in comparing compensation. Orszag stated that "when education and age are held constant, the entire difference in average pay between the federal and private sectors disappears"...

Also, as noted here, government workers (or those depending on government funding) are pretty much captives of the whims of our elected representatives in Washington, D.C., particularly an almost-retired U.S. senator who pulled his little stunt with the approval of his Repug would-be successor (though private sector employees are subject to the whims of their employers as well of course).

And by the way, if there is any Dem out there who could still be wondering whether or not they are going to vote for their party on November 2nd (and why in God’s name would you have a doubt about that at this point?), I hereby present Exhibit A regarding what a Republican-run-once-more U.S. House would do as opposed to trying to solve the critical problems this country currently faces.

Finally, I give you another installment of “This Day In Mikey Fitzpatrick History,” more or less here (and it’s a real whopper).

As you can see, on October 7, 2006, our former U.S. House rep did his best impression of a cigar store Indian while Air Force Major (and Young Philadelphia Republican) Kevin Kelly and Army Capt. Richard Barbato maligned Patrick Murphy’s military service.

Putting aside the fact that this was an utterly scurrilous attack (and thoroughly predictable given Mikey’s attempt to tar the husband of former Dem opponent Ginny Schrader in 2004 by associating him, a Jew, with Hezbollah), it defied basic logic. And that is because Kelly served in the Air Force and saw duty in Iraq from January to May of 2006; he claimed Murphy “did not see front-line duty.” How Kelly could be qualified to make an observation like that is a mystery, since Murphy served in the Army in Iraq from 2003 to 2004.

Also, soon after this theatrical garbage played out, a huge billboard endorsing Mikey’s re-election appeared as if by magic in the vicinity of Shady Brook Farm in these parts, a very visible location stuck amidst Route 332, I-95 and the main highway in Lower Makefield Township (that’s the place where the recent teabagger Bund rally took place the Friday before last).

This is all the more reason to support the re-election of our congressman by clicking here.