By Alexis Garrett Stodghill

Rep. Allen West is becoming famous for saying the most ridiculous things. As a man who entered Congress not even a year ago, he has transformed from being the Tea Party poster boy for their claims of racial inclusion into a figure who inspires vigorous head scratching with his boisterous words. Having JUST left behind the rancor caused by comparing himself to Harriet Tubman and black Democratic leaders to overseers on the Democratic plantation (I kid you not), Rep. West couldn’t just sit back for a moment and relax. That mouth had to keep on flapping — but now instead of trash-talking obvious enemies, he has decided to take on his real nemesis: GOP presidential hopeful Herman Cain.

Yes, another overly loud and painfully cantankerous Tea Party “favorite,” who also gleans his popularity from the fact that his blackness seems to prove that the overwhelmingly white political organization is not racist. Rep. Allen West probably does not appreciate his doppelganger, who is stealing his shine as the black far right lap dog. And he made his feelings known in a rather lengthy offhand comment made to left-leaning political site, Talking Points Memo. When asked his opinion of Cain’s recent apology to Muslim groups for making inflammatory comments against them, Wild Wild West had this to say:

Cain issued an apology to Muslims in July following his meeting with officials at a Virginia mosque for a “discussion about religion and politics.” The meeting came after Cain claimed that American communities had the right to ban mosques in their neighborhoods.

His apology earned him a verbal beating from former supporters on his Facebook page and on anti-Muslim blogs.

Not gonna happen with West, the Tea Party favorite told TPM following a news conference at the Capitol Hill screening he hosted of an anti-“Ground Zero mosque” film.

“He did not frame things in a very good objective and historical assessment, and I think he kind of got himself backed into a very ugly corner,” West told TPM. “I would never give anyone the opportunity to come back and exploit me making some type of gaffe, and I think that’s what happened.”

(Bloomberg) — Congress entered the final weekend before a threatened U.S. default deadlocked over legislation to raise the debt limit as President Barack Obama appealed to party leaders to reach a compromise.  The Senate yesterday rejected a plan the Republican- controlled House passed hours earlier with no Democratic support. It would have required congressional approval of a constitutional amendment to balance the budget and forced another debt-limit vote by lawmakers in about six months to continue the nation’s borrowing authority beyond early 2012.  Congressional leaders “need to start working together immediately to reach a compromise that avoids default and lays the basis for balanced deficit reduction,” White House Press Secretary Jay Carneysaid in a statement after the two votes.

Read More…

Seriously, when will politicians fear the words they send over email, twitter and facebook? The latest victim of self-sabotage is Republican Congressman Allen West, who sent a scathing email to fellow Democrat Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, that was released to the public recently.

The email included the statements: “You are the most vile, unprofessional, and despicable member of the U.S. House of Representatives. You have proven repeatedly that you are not a lady, therefore, shall not be afforded due respect from me.”

West cc’d other congress members on the email, so it’s not certain whether or not his intentions centered on generating attention for his maneuver. Certainly, many members of Congress and women’s rights groups are outraged over the email and West will have to answer some tough questions over the next few days.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

(Inc.) — Hoping to break the impasse over the nation’s debt limit, White Houseand congressional leaders and aides continued their private discussions Sunday to exchange possible proposals to keep the government from defaulting on its bills.  Senate leaders have shaped the outline of a compromise that would attach as much as $1.5 trillion largely in spending reductions to a debt ceiling increase, and establish a new congressional committee to present further cuts for a vote by year’s end. Other ideas also were being considered.  No signs emerged that the negotiations were as contentious as last week, when tempers sometimes flared. But no immediate breakthrough was apparent.  ”There have been a lot of conversations going on, and they will continue,” Jacob Lew, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, said on CNN’s ”State of the Union.”

Read More…

The current news cycle has been inundated with the tense struggle between the White House and Congressional Republicans and Democrats.  Whether on prime time news or in major newspapers, commentaries appear to focus on which side is right and who really is at fault for the present situation in which the country finds itself relative to debt.

President Obama has tried his best to work with House Speaker John Boehner and Congressional Republicans, and Vice President Joe Biden has been leading a bipartisan committee for months to establish a proposal to reduce the current deficit while attempting to satisfy both aisles and chambers of Congress.  Unfortunately, due to political posturing and an unwillingness to bypass pride for the benefit of the country, no deal has yet to be reached on arguably the most important decision of our era.

Because of the general perception that the debt ceiling issue is strictly confined to the geographical dimensions of the nation’s capital and Wall Street, there a plethora of individuals who believe that the failure to raise the debt limit for the country will not affect everyday citizens.  To be sure, there will be adverse implications for the nation if Congress is unable to reach a compromise before recessing on August 5, which is fast approaching.

Below are six ways in which the failure to raise the debt ceiling would trickle down and negatively affect everyday folks.  For many African-Americans, who have and continue to suffer significantly from the Great Recession in terms of unemployment, underemployment and personal finances, these ramifications could be extremely damaging.

Programs designed to help the poor such as HUD, temporary welfare, food stamps and WIC would likely lose funding.

One of the primary consequences that would assuredly take place if the Treasury is unable to pay all of its bills is that it would be forced to prioritize its payments.  Bipartisan economists agree that the Treasury’s highest priorities would be to ensure that it pays interest on treasury securities, social security benefits, Medicare/Medicaid, defense vendor payments and unemployment insurance benefits.

Unfortunately, continual funding for programs such as food stamps (SNAP), Woman, Infants and Children (WIC), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Health and Human Services grants and housing assistance for the poor would likely become impossible pretty quickly.  These aforementioned programs are not only important for the public-at-large but very essential for a large number of African-Americans.

Education programs such as Pell grants and special education state grants IRS refunds, veterans’ affairs and military active duty pay would likely lose funding.

Again, if the Treasury is forced to “prioritize” its payments, then continual funding for programs such as military active duty pay, veterans’ affairs, certain Department of Education programs such as Pell grants and special education state grants and IRS refunds, would likely become impossible pretty quickly.  Again, these aforementioned programs are not only essential for individuals across the board but very important for a substantial number of African-Americans.

By Alexis Garrett Stodghill

As Democrats and Republicans continue to argue about whether to raise the debt ceiling by August 2, Rep. Charles Rangel has offered a rather unusual means of coming to a solution. He appeared on Fox Business recently and recommended that “clergy of all faith should weigh in on the moral question” according to political tracking site Mediaite. This was in response to questions regarding Rangel’s recent comments, in which he wondered out loud “what would Jesus do” about the debt ceiling impasse.  Mediaite goes on to detail his surreal conversation with Judge Andrew Napolitano on the conservative channel:

The Judge wondered about Wrangel’s use of Jesus, “is this an honest inquiry or this a political ploy?” Yet Wrangel didn’t back down, insisting that “both sides have dug into positions that politically they can’t get out of by 2012.” Therefore, he thought it necessary for everyone to take a step back and realize what is “right.”

Wrangel’s apparent request for divine intervention was evidence to the Judge that things have become so partisan and possibly hopeless in Washington. And Wrangel responded, “there’s nothing wrong with praying.” The need for prayer was a point of agreement for Wrangel and the Judge. Yet whether it was moral for the present generation to borrow from future generations and kick the debt down the road, was something not even prayer seemed to be able to resolve between the two men.

The last time I checked, we were not living in a country run by a priesthood. The separation of church and state is still in effect. No, there is nothing wrong with praying, but it is disconcerting to see a sitting member of Congress discuss religion as a means for getting Republicans and Democrats to agree on a critical issue.

Life-threatening scenarios will unfold if we do not raise the debt ceiling. Social Security and unemployment checks might be stopped. The Unites States might default on loans, further harming our struggling economy as our credit is ruined on the international level. If the federal government shuts down because no agreement is reached, the African-American community will be deeply effected, as roughly 20% of blacks are employed by the public sector.

Prayer is a wonderful thing, but getting these warring parties to reconcile and prevent these catastrophes will take cunning political maneuvering. Things I don’t remember from the bible, unless Rangel meant “What would Judas do?”

Rep Rangel: Meditate on Jesus’ preferred actions for your life in your own private time. Please use these precious moments to make some phone calls “across the aisle,” and press for a deal. Spare America from an even worse economic nightmare. Sure, Jesus would do the “right thing,” but Democrats and Republicans have widely different views of what is right.

Democrats need to stay grounded in the material world and focus on doing what works. The fact is, the debt ceiling has been raised every time it was fiscally necessary in the history of the United States, according to TheRoot.com. Not much need for prayer in this instance, if you are looking for answers. A glance at history will do.

(Bloomberg) — Republicans in the House of Representatives will try today to restrict the U.S. military support President Barack Obama is giving the NATO-led bombardment of forces loyal to Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi.  Frustrated by what they term Obama’s insufficient consultation with Congress over Libya, House Republicans scheduled a vote to limit U.S. forces to aerial refueling, reconnaissance and search and rescue missions to support the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s bombing campaign.  The legislation will be debated along with a resolution that would formally support the mission for as long as a year under the 1973 War Powers Resolution — a measure that lawmakers and aides predicted would be defeated.  ”The president’s failure to consult with the Congress” and “to outline to the American people why we are doing this” put lawmakers “in a position to have to defend our responsibilities under the Constitution,” House Speaker John Boehner, an Ohio Republican, told reporters yesterday.

Read More…

by Anthony Jerrod

It seems like the “least of these” in our nation struggle more and more each day.  And, just when it appears that certain yokes have been broken in their lives, newfound injustices and chains manifest to prevent them from escaping the powerful grip of poverty.

Last night, when I learned that the House voted against controversial proposals to defund or truncate funding for certain programs for the poor, there was a brief moment of jubilation.  After assessing this temporary legislative victory, I begin to think about why certain lawmakers in the House of Representatives would want to cut more than $800 million from the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), $38 million from the Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP) and $63 million from The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP).  But, in the same bill, these same representatives did not see a problem with prospective amendments to appropriate funding for azaleas at the National Arboretum and wolf control.

Certainly, fiscal responsibility and significant reduction of our nation’s debt are warranted.  But, repairing the nation’s budget woes should not include proposals that could adversely impact long-established protections for the most vulnerable members of society.  Of course, certain critics have expressed strong sentiments such as, “The WIC  just encourages lazy people to have a lot of children and the middle class tax payer to flip the bill,” “Programs like the WIC, CSFP and TEFAP serve no purpose,” and “Sorry Grandma, you just won’t be able to eat.”  I find such callous statements to be devoid of wisdom, love and compassion.

As with any government-based program, there will be certain individuals who engage in fraudulent actions or who take advantage of the system; however, these people should not result in plans to disintegrate programs that help those who are genuinely in need of such assistance.

The WIC program “provides healthy foods like milk, eggs and infant formula to about 9 million poor mothers and pregnant women and their children.”   Of the 9 million individuals, sixty percent are kids between the ages of one and four years. Another 18 percent are newborns and infants not yet a year old. The remaining 20 percent of WIC beneficiaries are pregnant and postpartum women.  To qualify for this assistance that average roughly $41 per month, recipients’ income must be at or below 185 percent of the poverty line.  The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimated that the proposed cuts would have ended assistance to 350,000 low-income and children.

The CSFP provides food assistance to 600,000 low-income families every month, 96 percent of whom are seniors with incomes less than 130 percent of the federal poverty line (approximately $14,000 for a senior living alone). For many of these seniors, CSFP may be the only nutrition assistance program readily accessible to them.  Feeding America estimated that the amendments relative to this program would have resulted in more than 81,000 low-income seniors immediately being dropped.

The TEFAP serves over 100,000 households representing over 300,000 people each month.  The proposed cuts would have hurt local food banks and networks that were already struggling.

Although the controversial amendments were ultimately rejected, it is very interesting and hypocritical to see congressional leaders who repeatedly voted for tax cuts for the rich and corporate welfare subsidies for Big Oil companies devise plans to decrease spending on programs that put food on the tables of everyday people that are most in need.  Are the upkeep of azaleas and the control of wolves more important than people who are hurting and oppressed?  It seems like priorities among certain lawmakers are severely distorted.

Anthony Jerrod is a bestselling author, speaker, and public policy expert.

(Washington Post) — As Rep. James E. Clyburn settles behind his desk on the first floor of the Capitol, the view behind him — of the office buildings across Independence Avenue — is less than commanding. His office is high-ceilinged but narrow, and the walls are bare. Multiple aides are crammed into an adjoining room.  It’s a far cry from the spacious third-floor suite the South Carolina lawmaker occupied when he served as majority whip. But now that Democrats have been relegated to the minority, Clyburn is fortunate just to have an office in the Capitol and, more importantly, a place at the leadership table.

After their electoral drubbing in November, House Democratic leaders played an unusual game of musical chairs in which, rather than leave someone standing, they simply decided to add another seat. Thus was born Clyburn’s current title — assistant Democratic leader.  The post was created after it became clear that Clyburn couldn’t beat Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (Md.) for the minority whip position, but he also didn’t want to unseat either of the two men below him on the leadership ladder: Democratic Caucus Chairman John B. Larson (Conn.) and Caucus Vice Chairman Xavier Becerra (Calif.)

Read More…

(Wall Street Journal) — Congressional leaders reached a last-gasp agreement Friday to avert a shutdown of the federal government, after days of haggling and tense hours of brinksmanship.  Word of the deal came just an hour before a midnight deadline, as House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio), Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) and President Barack Obama made separate appearances before TV cameras to hail what they said were its historically large budget cuts.

Under the deal, the GOP won budget cuts of $39 billion for the remaining six months of the fiscal year, far more than either party had expected a few months ago. Democrats managed to hold off Republican demands to strip funding for the new health-care law and for a range of other Democratic priorities. GOP provisions to cut all federal funding to Planned Parenthood of America and National Public Radio also were dropped.  Also in the deal is a provision requiring an annual audit of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which had been created by last year’s Dodd-Frank financial overhaul law. Republicans have been widely critical of the law.

The budget battle was the first big standoff in the new Washington power structure created by November’s midterm election, in which Republicans seized control of the House on a surge of voter complaints about government spending. As bitter as the weekslong fight was, it served merely as a warm-up for bigger and more consequential battles to come. Some Republicans say they will vote against raising the federal debt ceiling in a few weeks unless it is accompanied by a plan to rein in deficits. In addition the GOP has laid out cuts and proposals in its budget plan for the next fiscal year that dwarf the deal struck Friday in scope and size.

Read More…