Great news. I hope that Andy Stern also supports seniors by not allowing impending cuts to SS and Medicare by the Petey deficit commission.
Progressives have to stand up for the public on big issues, not just “social justice” issues.

I’ve signed so many things lately..

If I’ve already signed this petition, will something filter out my duplicate signature?

I’m in.

Signed, tks, Jane.

Petition signed. Also, this page has been forwarded to a number of individuals requesting their participation.

Go Jane.

Great Letter, Real American Patriots, Great Cause. I signed the petition.

signed. will post on FB page and Tweet

Apologies in advance for the O/T.

Holy Shit.

holy shit

Jane –

Will sign, but have a minor beef with you:

You gotta stop identifying yourself as a blogger. In light of how much more you do, it’s demeaning.

You have to start identifying yourself in a way that lends more credibility and status to your position from an outsider’s perspective. I think it is also important for you to conceptualize yourself in terms of the larger role you are increasingly playing in the hopes of so many people for the future of this country.

I don’t know what the precise correct title/description is but I’m going to toss out a few key words just to start your thought processes and those of others who comment here. I suggest you take the best of any aggregate suggestions, then toss them around with your closest advisors and staff. So here goes:

Founder
Editor
Publisher
Chairman
CEO
Chief Executive

You might also consider expanding the description of FireDogLake, such as

Founder & Chairman, FDL and FDL Action

And FWIW, I think all of us here will probably agree that a more prestigious title will not go to your head.

Huh, never thought about that. I am a blogger so that’s what I usually say.

I’m in.

I want real world contemporary questions answered, like this one: Did TARP money bail out the “losers” on Goldman’s famed ABACUS CDO?

Here is the very list (second page) of securities that Paulson allegedly picked. At random, I picked the HEAT group.

There are repacked securities under HEAT in all the Maiden Lane vehicles the NY Fed created. Are any of those mortgage backed securities originally in the ABACUS deal?

And what is this $279,877,569 in cash for Goldman Sachs [pdf] in Maiden Lane 2?

Signed.

I call Mz Hamsher Lady Jane.

Yes, you’re a blogger. But you’ve become more than that. You’re evolving, become more of a leader and voice for true progressives. And as you become more visible to other people for the first time, you need an identifier that doesn’t appear to drag you down into the same category as those “people in pajamas in their basements”. I mean, Harry Knowles is a blogger. And you and Harry ain’t anywhere near equivalent. (Thank God.)

The way MSM reporting is declining, it won’t be long until people like you represent the effective totality of journalism. Maybe you should even consider “journalist” in your description because, hey, what the NYT and WaPoop and CNN do sure ain’t “journalism”, not the type I grew up with anyway.

ETA: Just thought of a comparison: Arianna blogs on HuffPo but doesn’t describe herself as a blogger. On Countdown she’s always “Founder and Editor” or “Founder and Publisher” of The Huffington Post.

And look at this way: how much harder will it be for a blogger to become President than an “executive” or “founder” or “publisher”?

It’s time to put a stop to Obama and his neo-liberalism. A Steering Committee dedicated to bring disparate groups of progressives together to act in a collective fashion is long past due. Labor, civil and immigration rights, veterans groups, environmentalists, anti-war, gay rights organizations, economic justice groups etc.. It’s time to band together and speak in one LOUD voice. There is one thing politicians fear more than anything and it’s the people united in righteous indignation.

“Who received the money? Against what collateral? On what terms and conditions? The only way to find out is through a complete audit of the Federal Reserve.”

That about says it all, why then is the Fed so anxious to stop this? What have they got to hide?

By the way, Jane, you should just call yourself SuperJane.

I thihk they’re worried that Geithner, Summers, Bernanke and Rubin will be found to be “dirty.” Quelle surprise!

Reuters is reporting another oil rig has collapsed in the Gulf.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

If that’s the case then I am disappointed. I know CYA is SOP in DC but after what happened in 2008 I would hope we would get some real oversight.

Ah, signatures. As we found out with the public option fiasco, signatures mean nothing. It’s a show. There isn’t going to be an audit or accountability or any freaking changes with the current government. Stop hoping and start being realistic. Vote them out!!

How bout Big Jane?

I concur. A slight cavil, however. Given that the term “progressive” is being used in an increasingly pejorative sense in many quarters, I’d probably lose that term in such correspondence, also. This is strictly a tactical move (as is dropping the “blogger” term), sense being a true progressive is, in fact, something to be proud of, and not the other way around. Why the term is being thrown around in a stupid, uninformed and even malicious way these days simply mystifies me, but the reality is there, unfortunately.

I’ll take that as a “no” then.

Signed. Thanks!

Yer an owner/operator of a VERY influential media outlet.

I agree, gotta get a title, ma’am.

It’s a badge, and at this point, you need a badge.

Despite the veal pen nature of badges, and what they command, it’s part of being in the game.

And ma’am, yer in the game so deep you ARE the game for many of us.

Please. Get a badge! ;-)

I like it.

SOMEONE has to put out a call to action, to FORM that steering committee. Reps from all types of orgs are summoned to meet, and persuaded of the positivity of FORMING this steering committee. Then, the reps all decide HOW to form the committee.

Then, the committee members are configured, they meet, and a new alliance is unveiled.

Without alluding to it as a third party in it’s initial stages, this process could QUICKLY become influential overnight.

And a party status could be enabled down the line.

But the PRESSURE the initial formation of such a committee and the organizing fulcrum it would represent, the ‘Bringing Together’ of the left, progs, libs (no veal penners), and independents from the academe, trades groups/labor, religions, cultural societies, ACLU, LGBT, Black/Latino/Native American/Asian . . . yadda yadda . . . a TENT that would house all these pieces?

An IMMEDIATE and VIABLE threat to the status quo.

I really, really, really like this. It MIGHT transcend the internecine disparity of the scrambled left/prog/lib/indy factions of today.

I really, really like this idea!!!!

Since we’re adding economic issues that progressives should support, I’ll add another one. Progressives should support ending NAFTA. It is unfair for Americans to have to struggle to find jobs while manufacturing jobs get shipped overseas.

Larue –

Like the idea as well. However, in the very, very beginning it needs to be small, very small meetings, almost like an underground movement in a totalitarian state. Many things need to be nailed down early, by small workable numbers of people. Get too many voices in the room too soon and all you get is debate. A small group sets a general outline, what we’re gonna aim for and what we’re going to put aside, and how we’re going to set about doing what we want to do, and a design (or a limited number of optional designs) for how the org might work.

There is also a second reason this has to be done sub rosa: we’re not the only ones who will recognize the true threat that this represents to the status quo. We cannot give the opposition any inkling of what’s coming until the last moment. Otherwise, they’ll organize opposition, pressure financial sources, sow division, triangulate, and sabotage things from the very beginning.

In closing, I’d look at who we really want in. Normally, you’d say labor union without a second thought. But do we really want HCR sellouts like Trumka and SEIU and the AFL-CIO on board? Maybe there is a way to reach out to individual locals and bypass the national level. Maybe we need to have our plan ready, then unveil it, then let pressure from their members force the union leadership to support us, not control and steer us.

Seconded.

I think founder and publisher of FDL would do nicely.

Yup.

Signed and forwarded to my political e-mail list.

This is probably the most positive amendment current senate has attempted so far equaling probably the Public Option, Anti-trust exemption removal for medical industry, reinstatement of Glass Steagall Act.

My hopes are not high but would really like to be surprised at-least this time if Senate and House realize they have capacity to pass good legislation simply relying on their common sense and definitely without any lobbyist support.

AUDIT THE FED AND AUDIT THE PENTAGON!

Auditng the Fed is in general a very bad idea, and that is why apart from Jamie Galbraith, there are no first-rate economists signed on to the proposal. Here’s the reason: a case can be made for auditing the bail-out, which is what Sanders’ bill purposes to do. If that were all there were to it, end of story, though the same purpose could be served by a Senate investigation with the proper subpoena powers. The reason why no front-rank economists are signing on is because most believe that the independence of the fed from political control is worth more than the information on the bail-out. There is a belief, founded or not, that once the Fed starts to be auditing, politicians will be calling the shots on monetary policy. This is what happened in 1970-71, when Nixon effectively triggered the great Inflation of the 1970s, because he recalled what happened in the spring of 1960 when the Fed tightened just before a general election.

I’m not claiming the fears are justified, but they are real, and need to be faced up.

Perhaps this article might change your thinking.

Salon. com — Saturday, May 1, 2010 — By John R. Talbott
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/feature/2010/05/01/trillion_dollar_fraud/index.html

The trillion-dollar fraud
Why is the Fed so opposed to being audited, and what does it have to hide?

And BTW, don’t sell this as just another way of saying “audit the bailout”. As commenters have noted, auditing the Fed in its entirety is likely to show a long lamentable history of screwing the taxpaying public over and over again.

Besides, a full audit is the first necessary step in abolishing the Fed as a private, for-profit institution, returning the issuance of our currency to the Treasury Department as Constitutionally mandated, and erected a new, true central bank answerable to the government and the people.