Subject: Correct The Record Monday January 12, 2015 Afternoon Roundup
From: Burns Strider <[email-masked]>
To: CTRFriendsFamily <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 13:53:27 -0500
List-Id: <CTRFriendsFamily.americanbridge.org>

*​**Correct The Record Monday January 12, 2015 Afternoon Roundup:*

*Tweets:*

*Pres. Bill Clinton* @billclinton: Remembering lives lost in #Haiti
<https://twitter.com/hashtag/Haiti?src=hash> 5 years ago and honoring the
resilience of the Haitian people. http://wjcf.co/1KCuNtU
<http://t.co/6HjzBehmI4> [1/12/15, 12:26 p.m. EST
<https://twitter.com/billclinton/status/554690858029961216>]

*Headlines:*

*MSNBC: “Dems zero in on agenda for middle class”
<http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/dems-zero-agenda-middle-class>*

“The fact that the proposal is being presented at the Center for American
Progress is itself a notable development – Hillary Clinton, should she
proceed with a presidential campaign, is likely to draw heavily from CAP
and its staff, suggesting Van Hollen’s idea may yet end up as part of a
national Democratic platform, all the while, helping Clinton connect with
the growing Elizabeth Warren wing of the party.”

*Washington Post blog: The Fix: “The Democrats’ 2016 field is more than a
decade older than Republicans’, on average”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/01/12/the-democrats-2016-field-is-more-than-a-decade-older-than-republicans-on-average/>*

“The average age that the possible Democratic contenders would be at
inauguration in 2017 is 68.6, just under the 69.3 years that Clinton would
be.”

*Des Moines Register: “Terry Branstad forgets Staci Appel’s name while
insulting her”
<http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2015/01/12/terry-branstad-staci-appel-democrats/21632015/>*

GOV. BRANSTAD: “They’re going to clear the field for Hillary Clinton,
another flawed candidate, just like Braley was a flawed candidate, just
like Hatch was flawed candidate, just like – what’s her name?, I’ve already
forgotten it – just like Appel was a flawed candidate!”

*Washington Post blog: The Fix: “There is now an anti-Hillary Clinton
coloring book. And, yes, there is a Benghazi page.”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/01/12/there-is-now-an-anti-hillary-clinton-coloring-book/>*

“At the end of last year, Ulysses Press released a Hillary Clinton coloring
book.”

*Articles:*

*MSNBC: “Dems zero in on agenda for middle class”
<http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/dems-zero-agenda-middle-class>*

By Steve Benen

January 12, 2015, 12:35 p.m. EST

If Republicans and the Beltway establishment hoped that Democrats would
take a sharp turn to the right in the wake of the 2014 midterms, much of
Washington is no doubt disappointed right now.

Kevin Drum noted last week, “One of the hot topics of conversation in
progressive circles these days is the middle class. Democrats support
plenty of programs that provide benefits to the poor (Medicaid, minimum
wage, SNAP, etc.), but what about programs that benefit the middle class?”

Dems arguably already have a pretty solid case to make, pointing to
policies like the Affordable Care Act, but the party’s focus is apparently
poised to zero in on the middle class with even more specificity this year.
This includes, obviously, President Obama’s new proposal on free
community-college tuition and talk of pushing for higher wages through
overtime regulations.

But as the Washington Post reported overnight, there’s another striking
idea taking shape as part of the Democrats’ economic agenda.

“Senior Democrats, dissatisfied with the party’s tepid prescriptions for
combating income inequality, are drafting an ‘action plan’ that calls for a
massive transfer of wealth from the super-rich and Wall Street traders to
the heart of the middle class.

“The centerpiece of the proposal, set to be unveiled Monday by Rep. Chris
Van Hollen (D-Md.), is a ‘paycheck bonus credit’ that would shave $2,000 a
year off the tax bills of couples earning less than $200,000. Other
provisions would nearly triple the tax credit for child care and reward
people who save at least $500 a year.”

A new  fee on financial transactions, coupled with few breaks for the top
1%, would deliver a $1.2 trillion “windfall,” which Van Hollen would invest
directly in the middle class.

This is a pretty big deal, not because the idea stands a credible chance in
a Republican-led Congress – it doesn’t – but because of what a proposal
like this says about Democratic priorities. As Ed Kilgore noted this
morning, Van Hollen’s measure  is “one of the more frankly redistributive
proposals coming from anywhere other than the Progressive Caucus in a good
while, and the central prominence of the financial transaction tax makes it
a direct shot at Wall Street.”

And in case this isn’t obvious, Chris Van Hollen is a close ally of House
Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) – so when he presents a proposal
like this, the Maryland Democrat is speaking for more than just himself.

“This is a plan to help tackle the challenge of our times,” Van Hollen
said, previewing a Monday speech at the Center for American Progress. “We
want a growing economy that works for all Americans, not just the wealthy
few.”

The details of the package are not yet available, but the Post’s report
sketched out the populist plan.

“To spur employers to increase pay, the plan would target corporations,
prohibiting companies from deducting executive performance bonuses in
excess of $1 million, a benefit worth $66 billion from 2007 to 2010. To
claim the deduction, companies would have to demonstrate that workers had
shared in the company’s good fortunes by increasing wages about 4 percent,
on par with inflation and productivity growth.

“Other provisions would provide incentives to companies that give workers a
share of corporate profits and invest in job training, through
apprenticeship programs or partnerships with community colleges.

“Blossoming wages would also stretch further under the plan, primarily
through the paycheck bonus, worth $1,000 to individuals and $2,000 to
couples. The idea is similar to Obama’s ‘Make Work Pay’ credit, part of the
2009 stimulus package, but Obama’s credit was temporary and, at $400 per
person, much smaller.”

The fact that the proposal is being presented at the Center for American
Progress is itself a notable development – Hillary Clinton, should she
proceed with a presidential campaign, is likely to draw heavily from CAP
and its staff, suggesting Van Hollen’s idea may yet end up as part of a
national Democratic platform, all the while, helping Clinton connect with
the growing Elizabeth Warren wing of the party.

*Washington Post blog: The Fix: “The Democrats’ 2016 field is more than a
decade older than Republicans’, on average”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/01/12/the-democrats-2016-field-is-more-than-a-decade-older-than-republicans-on-average/>*

By Philip Bump

January 12, 2015, 9:51 a.m. EST

Former TV appear-er Jay Leno, often considered one of the 280 million
funniest people in America, appeared on "Real Time with Bill Maher" on
Friday, where he had a chance to offer some of his trademark "zingers" on
political topics.

The most notable comments came when Leno was discussing Hillary Clinton.
"Her and Elizabeth Warren are almost the same age, and I see Elizabeth
Warren come out throwing punches boom, boom, boom, boom, boom," Leno said,
then saying that Clinton "seems very slow."

The Warren comments elicited applause, as you might expect, but it was
Leno's next comments that raise an interesting point. "I ask people," he
said, "'How much younger is Elizabeth Warren?' 'Oh, 15 years.' 'No! 18
months!'"

Certainly in part because Hillary Clinton has been on the national stage so
long (some 23 years, if you're counting), people do tend to assume that she
is significantly older than Sen. Warren (D-Mass.), who's only served in the
Senate since 2013. In the possible Democratic field for 2016, however, the
two of them are actually among the younger possible nominees, despite
critiques from people like Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.).

The average age that the possible Democratic contenders would be at
inauguration in 2017 is 68.6, just under the 69.3 years that Clinton would
be. That's a full decade older than average inauguration age of the
much-bigger, much-younger possible Republican field -- the oldest of whom
is a gentleman named Mitt Romney. The Republicans average 57 years in age
on January 20, 2017.

[GRAPH]

This doesn't really tell us much about what's likely to happen over the
next 22 months, particularly when you consider the past few elections. On
the day of the 2009 inauguration, Barack Obama was significantly younger
than Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) -- as was Bill Clinton younger than George
H. W. Bush when inaugurated in 1993. But George W. Bush was only slightly
older than Al Gore in 2001, while Ronald Reagan was significantly older
than Walter Mondale by the time his second inauguration rolled around in
1985.

[GRAPH]

Reagan, of course, offered one of the all-time great responses to questions
of his age.

One can imagine Hillary Clinton leveling a similar line against Warren in a
debate. "I will not make age an issue in this campaign. I will not exploit
for political purposes my opponent's youth and inexperience."

A line like that could easily vault a person into the ranks of the 100
million funniest people in America.

*Des Moines Register: “Terry Branstad forgets Staci Appel’s name while
insulting her”
<http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2015/01/12/terry-branstad-staci-appel-democrats/21632015/>*

By Jason Noble

January 12, 2015, 10:16 a.m. CST

At a breakfast kicking off the new legislative session, Iowa Gov. Terry
Branstad had a few things to say about national politics.

Speaking to a group of about 150 Republican officeholders, political
staffers and lobbyists, the newly re-elected GOP governor called for party
unity in the upcoming presidential contest and tossed a few barbs at
Democrats from Des Moines to D.C.

“As I look forward to 2016, I think the Democrats may be making the same
mistake for president they made (in Iowa) for senator, for governor and for
Congress in the 3rd District,” Branstad said.

“They’re going to clear the field for Hillary Clinton, another flawed
candidate, just like Braley was a flawed candidate, just like Hatch was
flawed candidate, just like – what’s her name?, I’ve already forgotten it –
just like Appel was a flawed candidate!”

Those were references, of course, to Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Bruce
Braley, gubernatorial candidate Jack Hatch and 3rd District candidate Staci
Appel, all of whom entered last year’s general election without a primary
challenge and all of whom lost in the 2014 GOP wave.

Branstad was also stern with the Republicans in the room, though, insisting
that they put aside intraparty divisions once a presidential nominee is
selected in 2016.

“We Republicans are going to have a wide open and a very talented field of
candidates,” he said. “There’s a lesson for us, though. Instead of
attacking each other we need to focus on restoring America.”

He went on, “We in Iowa have a unique opportunity as we look forward to
2016 to work together, regardless of who our first choice might be, to
unite behind and support a Republican that can win back the White House and
restore respect and fiscal integrity in this country.”

*Washington Post blog: The Fix: “There is now an anti-Hillary Clinton
coloring book. And, yes, there is a Benghazi page.”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/01/12/there-is-now-an-anti-hillary-clinton-coloring-book/>*

By Jaime Fuller

January 12, 2015, 12:45 p.m. EST

At the end of last year, Ulysses Press released a Hillary Clinton coloring
book. It is titled, "Hillary: The Coloring Book." The Chicago Sun-Times
described the Clinton-themed entertainment thusly:

“Unlike ‘Ted Cruz Saves America,’ Clinton doesn’t get the superhero
treatment, but instead, has a heavy dose of pantsuits, ready to be finished
off by your young artists.”

Amazon reviewers seemed to be big fans of the Hillary coloring book, noting
its "attractive matte cover" and its appropriateness for "adults or kids."
One reviewer wrote that she "bought this coloring book as a joke for my 33
year old daughter who attended college and interned with Hillary's speech
writer in DC. It became 'the gift' for Christmas and was posted on her
Facebook page."

Unsurprisingly, the Republican opposition research organization America
Rising PAC did not agree, and decided to make a supplement to the Hillary
Clinton coloring book.

If you ever wanted to color in a picture of Hillary Clinton testifying
about the Benghazi attacks, now is your chance.

In a world that includes politicians making Harlem Shake videos,
politicians taking selfies and politicians being Twitter trolls, you may
not be shocked to learn this isn't the first time someone has designed
anti-Hillary Clinton coloring book pages. In 2007, the "Very Unofficial
Hillary Clinton Coloring Book" included "challenging activities for all
ages" including, "'Help Hillary be More Macho' and 'Dress Bill for Any
Occasion' (paper doll cut out clothes), and 'Play Running Mate Roulette.'"

Now might be the point in this post where you groan about how intense
opposition research groups have become (one did chase Scott Brown in a
canoe during the midterms), but in the case of coloring books, they're just
following historical precedent. This is far from the first time a publisher
has let inquiring minds color in a candidate who has managed to keep
statements about their political future aggravatingly monochrome.

You can find coloring books about Pope Francis, 9/11, Barack Obama, the
2012 presidential election, elections in Canada during the 1960s, JFK,
elections in Chicago during the 1980s, Fidel Castro, Geraldine Ferraro,
Nikita Khrushchev, state income taxes in New Jersey and disaster
preparedness. In the 1960s, coloring book were produced that made fun of
the John Birch Society, bureaucrats and JFK's "New Frontier."

An article in the New York Times discussing these satirical coloring books
could not ascertain what benefit the coloring book makers got from
producing them.