how to budget personal finances

Events of the last week have made the Deficit Commission an embarrassment. Co-Chair Alan Simpson is a one-man disaster movie, compulsively offending one key voting bloc after another. Commission member Paul Ryan faced an angry crowd over his anti-Social Security stance, while another Commissioner locked experienced workers out of a nuclear facility rather than provide retirement benefits.

That's right: He's cutting retirement benefits.

But if the political blowback is obvious, here's what isn't: The Commissioners who are determined to cut your Social Security benefits are going to enjoy their own retirements in comfort. Their own pension plans insulate them from the fears that many other Americans face, and they don't have the professional expertise that would help them understand those concerns. In fact, the Commission's only expert on retirement is Rep. Jan Schakowsky, and she apparently opposes benefit cuts. The rest of the Commission is dominated by people who've expressed their desire to cut Social Security, despite their own secure futures. Millions of working Americans who have contributed to Social Security all their lives will lose out if these Commissioners have their way.

Happy Labor Day.

Normally I consider it off-limits to discuss people's personal finances when discussing their political opinions. But these Commissioners' lack of subject matter expertise, along with their lack of empathy, is important. If you don't know much about the topic and are protected from the problem, what makes you credible? Their pre-established prejudices makes the situation even worse, and their own situations underscore the irony of their self-professed willingness to make "brave choices" - choices whose consequences will mean little or nothing to them.

The Commission's Social Security obsession is odd anyway, since the projected Social Security shortfall comes out to only 0.7% of GDP. Nevertheless, these Commissioners have made their benefit-cutting intentions plain, presumably because they want to offer up America's seniors as a sacrifice to the bond markets. So how will these would-be income-slashers for the elderly make out in their own golden years? They'll be golden.

Consider Commissioner Alice Rivlin. Rivlin co-authored a paper that called for raising the retirement age and other benefit cuts, and recently released a specious paper about "Saving Social Security." As a former HEW Undersecretary, CBO Director, White House Budget Director, and Federal Reserve Vice Chair, she will presumably enjoy a comfortable retirement supported by multiple public pensions. Says Rivlin: ""We can't get out of this problem without doing both spending cuts, especially slowing the growth of entitlement, and tax increases."

Experts on Social Security finance (including the long-time Chief Actuary for the program) flatly disagree with Rivlin, pointing out that an adjustment to the payroll tax cap would unquestionably be enough to get the job done. They have the numbers to prove it. So why does Rivlin, who does not have their expertise in this area, disagree? Go ask Alice.

Co-Chair Erskine Bowles brokered a deal with Newt Gingrich to cut Social Security in the 1990s, when he served as Bill Clinton's Chief of Staff. Before that he headed the Small Business Administration, so his government tenure presumably qualifies him for a Federal pension. If not, don't worry: He receives $425,000 per year in his current job running the public universities of North Carolina, and the people of North Carolina are presumably also funding a pension on his behalf. To his credit, Bowles pledged to donate $125,000 of his salary for need-based student funds - but then, he can afford it. As the son of a US Congressman, Bowles had the education and connections needed to make millions as an investment banker. The added income he earns today as a Board member for General Motors and Morgan Stanley will help, too - and his government experience undoubtedly helped him win those positions, too.

Republican Rep. Paul Ryan, an aggressive advocate of Social Security cuts and privatization, will also enjoy his sunset years in comfort, thanks to a publicly-funded pension from his tenure as a Congressman. (He'll presumably earn even more as a result of his employment as an aide to two United States Senators.) Rep. Jeb Hensaerling has served as both a Representative and as an aide to Sen. Phil Gramm, so he should be safe from financial insecurity in his old age too .

The average annual pension payments for former members of Congress ranged from $41,000 to $55,000 in 2002, considerably more than the average $13,836 that Social Security recipients received in 2009. Yet neither Ryan nor Hensaerling have proposed cutting Congressional retirement benefits - nor should they. Sound pension plans like theirs were once available to most working Americans, and more effort should be made to restore them.

Former SEIU President Andrew Stern, who once might have been counted on to defend Social Security, recently sneered at Commission critics as "assassins of change" while saying that "all entitlements should be on the table." Mr. Stern's annual pension is $152,000 - and he retired at the age of 59, not 70. Nevertheless, Stern now publicly muses about "whether defined benefit pensions can really exist in the long run in a globalized economy."

Judd Gregg, who wants to raise the retirement age to 70, will receive a Federal pension for his Senate position. Gregg, like Alan Simpson, is the son of a Governor (self-made men, you might say), which means that public pensions also ensured that neither of them had to worry about supporting their aged parents. Tom Coburn, another would-be Social Security cutter, will receive a Congressional and Senatorial pension too.

David Cote, the CEO of Honeywell, provides some "private enterprise" perspective to the Commission's work. But Cote's wealth comes in part from Honeywell's government contracts, which exceed $4 billion annually. What's more, Cote's "free enterprise" ethic didn't stop him from making sure that Honeywell grabbed a few million in stimulus money from the taxpayers, too. A few billion from the Pentagon here, a few million more from Uncle Sam there - that'll plump up the nest egg a little for Mr. Cote's sunset years.

Cote made the headlines this week when Honeywell locked out the union workers at a nuclear power plant over a labor dispute - even though the workers agreed to stay on the job to protect public safety. Instead, Cote hired replacements and put them through a pared-down training process. The image of Homer Simpson comes to mind, pushing the wrong buttons and spilling beer on the reactor console - which would presumably make Cote Mr. Burns.

But it's no joking matter. Apparently there's real danger, which is why the Nuclear Regulatory Commission reportedly stepped in to block Honeywell from distilling uranium with its crew of replacement workers And what are the union and Honeywell arguing about? Honeywell's raising health care costs - and eliminating retiree pension plans for new workers.

That's right. A member of the Commission that's pretending to judge our retirement security with impartiality would rather have hastily-trained amateurs handle nuclear materials than bargain openly with his workers - about their retirement. D'oh!

As for Simpson (Alan, not Bart), to say that he suffers from "political Tourette's syndrome" would be a disservice to Tourette's sufferers. Most of them don't really say socially objectionable things, and those who do (it's called "coprolalia") don't mean what they say. But Simpson does. By attacking senior citizens as "greedy geezers," then offending women with his "milk cow with 100 million tits" comment, and now offending veterans' groups, Simpson has now hit the voting bloc trifecta.

And Cote's outraged labor, a fourth group. But the problem isn't Simpson anymore, or Cote for that matter. It's the Commission itself. The coprolalic curmudgeon Simpson has done a service to the nation. He's drawn attention to the Commission, and to the anti-Social Security biases held by so many of its members - all of whom will retire in comfort, thanks to those whose benefits they would cut. It's the comfortable afflicting the afflicted.

If these Deficit Commission members want their recommendations to have any credibility, they should pledge to live on the same Social Security benefits that they would impose for other Americans. Better yet, they should dedicate themselves to helping provide every American with the kind of retirement security they enjoy. That was part of the social contract this nation embraced during its years of greatest economic growth, the fulfillment of a promise that a lifetime of work should never end with years of deprivation. They should be working to restore that contract, not erode it even further.

One thing is clear: This Commission has no business making recommendations about Social Security.

(Sign a petition asking Congress and the President to protect Social Security from the Deficit Commission. Roger Hickey has more here.)

Additional links:

* Sam Seder and I discussed Social Security this week while co-hosting The Young Turks.

* For further reference on the Commission's members and their biases, see Firedoglake and Talking Points Memo.

* House Democrats are vowing to protect Social Security from any cuts. The polls show why that's a very wise idea.

Events of the last week have made the Deficit Commission an embarrassment. Co-Chair Alan Simpson is a one-man disaster movie, compulsively offending one key voting bloc after another. Commission member Paul Ryan faced an angry crowd over his anti-Social Security stance, while another Commissioner locked experienced workers out of a nuclear facility rather than provide retirement benefits.

That's right: He's cutting retirement benefits.

But if the political blowback is obvious, here's what isn't: The Commissioners who are determined to cut your Social Security benefits are going to enjoy their own retirements in comfort. Their own pension plans insulate them from the fears that many other Americans face, and they don't have the professional expertise that would help them understand those concerns. In fact, the Commission's only expert on retirement is Rep. Jan Schakowsky, and she apparently opposes benefit cuts. The rest of the Commission is dominated by people who've expressed their desire to cut Social Security, despite their own secure futures. Millions of working Americans who have contributed to Social Security all their lives will lose out if these Commissioners have their way.

Happy Labor Day.

Normally I consider it off-limits to discuss people's personal finances when discussing their political opinions. But these Commissioners' lack of subject matter expertise, along with their lack of empathy, is important. If you don't know much about the topic and are protected from the problem, what makes you credible? Their pre-established prejudices makes the situation even worse, and their own situations underscore the irony of their self-professed willingness to make "brave choices" - choices whose consequences will mean little or nothing to them.

The Commission's Social Security obsession is odd anyway, since the projected Social Security shortfall comes out to only 0.7% of GDP. Nevertheless, these Commissioners have made their benefit-cutting intentions plain, presumably because they want to offer up America's seniors as a sacrifice to the bond markets. So how will these would-be income-slashers for the elderly make out in their own golden years? They'll be golden.

Consider Commissioner Alice Rivlin. Rivlin co-authored a paper that called for raising the retirement age and other benefit cuts, and recently released a specious paper about "Saving Social Security." As a former HEW Undersecretary, CBO Director, White House Budget Director, and Federal Reserve Vice Chair, she will presumably enjoy a comfortable retirement supported by multiple public pensions. Says Rivlin: ""We can't get out of this problem without doing both spending cuts, especially slowing the growth of entitlement, and tax increases."

Experts on Social Security finance (including the long-time Chief Actuary for the program) flatly disagree with Rivlin, pointing out that an adjustment to the payroll tax cap would unquestionably be enough to get the job done. They have the numbers to prove it. So why does Rivlin, who does not have their expertise in this area, disagree? Go ask Alice.

Co-Chair Erskine Bowles brokered a deal with Newt Gingrich to cut Social Security in the 1990s, when he served as Bill Clinton's Chief of Staff. Before that he headed the Small Business Administration, so his government tenure presumably qualifies him for a Federal pension. If not, don't worry: He receives $425,000 per year in his current job running the public universities of North Carolina, and the people of North Carolina are presumably also funding a pension on his behalf. To his credit, Bowles pledged to donate $125,000 of his salary for need-based student funds - but then, he can afford it. As the son of a US Congressman, Bowles had the education and connections needed to make millions as an investment banker. The added income he earns today as a Board member for General Motors and Morgan Stanley will help, too - and his government experience undoubtedly helped him win those positions, too.

Republican Rep. Paul Ryan, an aggressive advocate of Social Security cuts and privatization, will also enjoy his sunset years in comfort, thanks to a publicly-funded pension from his tenure as a Congressman. (He'll presumably earn even more as a result of his employment as an aide to two United States Senators.) Rep. Jeb Hensaerling has served as both a Representative and as an aide to Sen. Phil Gramm, so he should be safe from financial insecurity in his old age too .

The average annual pension payments for former members of Congress ranged from $41,000 to $55,000 in 2002, considerably more than the average $13,836 that Social Security recipients received in 2009. Yet neither Ryan nor Hensaerling have proposed cutting Congressional retirement benefits - nor should they. Sound pension plans like theirs were once available to most working Americans, and more effort should be made to restore them.

Former SEIU President Andrew Stern, who once might have been counted on to defend Social Security, recently sneered at Commission critics as "assassins of change" while saying that "all entitlements should be on the table." Mr. Stern's annual pension is $152,000 - and he retired at the age of 59, not 70. Nevertheless, Stern now publicly muses about "whether defined benefit pensions can really exist in the long run in a globalized economy."

Judd Gregg, who wants to raise the retirement age to 70, will receive a Federal pension for his Senate position. Gregg, like Alan Simpson, is the son of a Governor (self-made men, you might say), which means that public pensions also ensured that neither of them had to worry about supporting their aged parents. Tom Coburn, another would-be Social Security cutter, will receive a Congressional and Senatorial pension too.

David Cote, the CEO of Honeywell, provides some "private enterprise" perspective to the Commission's work. But Cote's wealth comes in part from Honeywell's government contracts, which exceed $4 billion annually. What's more, Cote's "free enterprise" ethic didn't stop him from making sure that Honeywell grabbed a few million in stimulus money from the taxpayers, too. A few billion from the Pentagon here, a few million more from Uncle Sam there - that'll plump up the nest egg a little for Mr. Cote's sunset years.

Cote made the headlines this week when Honeywell locked out the union workers at a nuclear power plant over a labor dispute - even though the workers agreed to stay on the job to protect public safety. Instead, Cote hired replacements and put them through a pared-down training process. The image of Homer Simpson comes to mind, pushing the wrong buttons and spilling beer on the reactor console - which would presumably make Cote Mr. Burns.

But it's no joking matter. Apparently there's real danger, which is why the Nuclear Regulatory Commission reportedly stepped in to block Honeywell from distilling uranium with its crew of replacement workers And what are the union and Honeywell arguing about? Honeywell's raising health care costs - and eliminating retiree pension plans for new workers.

That's right. A member of the Commission that's pretending to judge our retirement security with impartiality would rather have hastily-trained amateurs handle nuclear materials than bargain openly with his workers - about their retirement. D'oh!

As for Simpson (Alan, not Bart), to say that he suffers from "political Tourette's syndrome" would be a disservice to Tourette's sufferers. Most of them don't really say socially objectionable things, and those who do (it's called "coprolalia") don't mean what they say. But Simpson does. By attacking senior citizens as "greedy geezers," then offending women with his "milk cow with 100 million tits" comment, and now offending veterans' groups, Simpson has now hit the voting bloc trifecta.

And Cote's outraged labor, a fourth group. But the problem isn't Simpson anymore, or Cote for that matter. It's the Commission itself. The coprolalic curmudgeon Simpson has done a service to the nation. He's drawn attention to the Commission, and to the anti-Social Security biases held by so many of its members - all of whom will retire in comfort, thanks to those whose benefits they would cut. It's the comfortable afflicting the afflicted.

If these Deficit Commission members want their recommendations to have any credibility, they should pledge to live on the same Social Security benefits that they would impose for other Americans. Better yet, they should dedicate themselves to helping provide every American with the kind of retirement security they enjoy. That was part of the social contract this nation embraced during its years of greatest economic growth, the fulfillment of a promise that a lifetime of work should never end with years of deprivation. They should be working to restore that contract, not erode it even further.

One thing is clear: This Commission has no business making recommendations about Social Security.

(Sign a petition asking Congress and the President to protect Social Security from the Deficit Commission. Roger Hickey has more here.)

Additional links:

* Sam Seder and I discussed Social Security this week while co-hosting The Young Turks.

* For further reference on the Commission's members and their biases, see Firedoglake and Talking Points Memo.

* House Democrats are vowing to protect Social Security from any cuts. The polls show why that's a very wise idea.

Cable <b>News</b> Ratings: Top 30 Programs In Q3 2010 (PHOTOS)

Fox News' domination of the cable news rankings continued in Q3, with the network holding its grip on the top 11 programs in cable news. How did individual shows do?

New York Times Backs <b>News</b>-Aggregation Software Company - Digits - WSJ

The New York Times Co. is joining a group of news organizations in backing the maker of software that helps publishers aggregate news, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Nintendo: 4m 3DS sales in first month 3DS <b>News</b> - Page 1 <b>...</b>

Read our 3DS news of Nintendo: 4m 3DS sales in first month.

benchcraft company scam
bench craft company rip off

Cable <b>News</b> Ratings: Top 30 Programs In Q3 2010 (PHOTOS)

Fox News' domination of the cable news rankings continued in Q3, with the network holding its grip on the top 11 programs in cable news. How did individual shows do?

New York Times Backs <b>News</b>-Aggregation Software Company - Digits - WSJ

The New York Times Co. is joining a group of news organizations in backing the maker of software that helps publishers aggregate news, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Nintendo: 4m 3DS sales in first month 3DS <b>News</b> - Page 1 <b>...</b>

Read our 3DS news of Nintendo: 4m 3DS sales in first month.

bench craft company rip off bench craft company rip off

Events of the last week have made the Deficit Commission an embarrassment. Co-Chair Alan Simpson is a one-man disaster movie, compulsively offending one key voting bloc after another. Commission member Paul Ryan faced an angry crowd over his anti-Social Security stance, while another Commissioner locked experienced workers out of a nuclear facility rather than provide retirement benefits.

That's right: He's cutting retirement benefits.

But if the political blowback is obvious, here's what isn't: The Commissioners who are determined to cut your Social Security benefits are going to enjoy their own retirements in comfort. Their own pension plans insulate them from the fears that many other Americans face, and they don't have the professional expertise that would help them understand those concerns. In fact, the Commission's only expert on retirement is Rep. Jan Schakowsky, and she apparently opposes benefit cuts. The rest of the Commission is dominated by people who've expressed their desire to cut Social Security, despite their own secure futures. Millions of working Americans who have contributed to Social Security all their lives will lose out if these Commissioners have their way.

Happy Labor Day.

Normally I consider it off-limits to discuss people's personal finances when discussing their political opinions. But these Commissioners' lack of subject matter expertise, along with their lack of empathy, is important. If you don't know much about the topic and are protected from the problem, what makes you credible? Their pre-established prejudices makes the situation even worse, and their own situations underscore the irony of their self-professed willingness to make "brave choices" - choices whose consequences will mean little or nothing to them.

The Commission's Social Security obsession is odd anyway, since the projected Social Security shortfall comes out to only 0.7% of GDP. Nevertheless, these Commissioners have made their benefit-cutting intentions plain, presumably because they want to offer up America's seniors as a sacrifice to the bond markets. So how will these would-be income-slashers for the elderly make out in their own golden years? They'll be golden.

Consider Commissioner Alice Rivlin. Rivlin co-authored a paper that called for raising the retirement age and other benefit cuts, and recently released a specious paper about "Saving Social Security." As a former HEW Undersecretary, CBO Director, White House Budget Director, and Federal Reserve Vice Chair, she will presumably enjoy a comfortable retirement supported by multiple public pensions. Says Rivlin: ""We can't get out of this problem without doing both spending cuts, especially slowing the growth of entitlement, and tax increases."

Experts on Social Security finance (including the long-time Chief Actuary for the program) flatly disagree with Rivlin, pointing out that an adjustment to the payroll tax cap would unquestionably be enough to get the job done. They have the numbers to prove it. So why does Rivlin, who does not have their expertise in this area, disagree? Go ask Alice.

Co-Chair Erskine Bowles brokered a deal with Newt Gingrich to cut Social Security in the 1990s, when he served as Bill Clinton's Chief of Staff. Before that he headed the Small Business Administration, so his government tenure presumably qualifies him for a Federal pension. If not, don't worry: He receives $425,000 per year in his current job running the public universities of North Carolina, and the people of North Carolina are presumably also funding a pension on his behalf. To his credit, Bowles pledged to donate $125,000 of his salary for need-based student funds - but then, he can afford it. As the son of a US Congressman, Bowles had the education and connections needed to make millions as an investment banker. The added income he earns today as a Board member for General Motors and Morgan Stanley will help, too - and his government experience undoubtedly helped him win those positions, too.

Republican Rep. Paul Ryan, an aggressive advocate of Social Security cuts and privatization, will also enjoy his sunset years in comfort, thanks to a publicly-funded pension from his tenure as a Congressman. (He'll presumably earn even more as a result of his employment as an aide to two United States Senators.) Rep. Jeb Hensaerling has served as both a Representative and as an aide to Sen. Phil Gramm, so he should be safe from financial insecurity in his old age too .

The average annual pension payments for former members of Congress ranged from $41,000 to $55,000 in 2002, considerably more than the average $13,836 that Social Security recipients received in 2009. Yet neither Ryan nor Hensaerling have proposed cutting Congressional retirement benefits - nor should they. Sound pension plans like theirs were once available to most working Americans, and more effort should be made to restore them.

Former SEIU President Andrew Stern, who once might have been counted on to defend Social Security, recently sneered at Commission critics as "assassins of change" while saying that "all entitlements should be on the table." Mr. Stern's annual pension is $152,000 - and he retired at the age of 59, not 70. Nevertheless, Stern now publicly muses about "whether defined benefit pensions can really exist in the long run in a globalized economy."

Judd Gregg, who wants to raise the retirement age to 70, will receive a Federal pension for his Senate position. Gregg, like Alan Simpson, is the son of a Governor (self-made men, you might say), which means that public pensions also ensured that neither of them had to worry about supporting their aged parents. Tom Coburn, another would-be Social Security cutter, will receive a Congressional and Senatorial pension too.

David Cote, the CEO of Honeywell, provides some "private enterprise" perspective to the Commission's work. But Cote's wealth comes in part from Honeywell's government contracts, which exceed $4 billion annually. What's more, Cote's "free enterprise" ethic didn't stop him from making sure that Honeywell grabbed a few million in stimulus money from the taxpayers, too. A few billion from the Pentagon here, a few million more from Uncle Sam there - that'll plump up the nest egg a little for Mr. Cote's sunset years.

Cote made the headlines this week when Honeywell locked out the union workers at a nuclear power plant over a labor dispute - even though the workers agreed to stay on the job to protect public safety. Instead, Cote hired replacements and put them through a pared-down training process. The image of Homer Simpson comes to mind, pushing the wrong buttons and spilling beer on the reactor console - which would presumably make Cote Mr. Burns.

But it's no joking matter. Apparently there's real danger, which is why the Nuclear Regulatory Commission reportedly stepped in to block Honeywell from distilling uranium with its crew of replacement workers And what are the union and Honeywell arguing about? Honeywell's raising health care costs - and eliminating retiree pension plans for new workers.

That's right. A member of the Commission that's pretending to judge our retirement security with impartiality would rather have hastily-trained amateurs handle nuclear materials than bargain openly with his workers - about their retirement. D'oh!

As for Simpson (Alan, not Bart), to say that he suffers from "political Tourette's syndrome" would be a disservice to Tourette's sufferers. Most of them don't really say socially objectionable things, and those who do (it's called "coprolalia") don't mean what they say. But Simpson does. By attacking senior citizens as "greedy geezers," then offending women with his "milk cow with 100 million tits" comment, and now offending veterans' groups, Simpson has now hit the voting bloc trifecta.

And Cote's outraged labor, a fourth group. But the problem isn't Simpson anymore, or Cote for that matter. It's the Commission itself. The coprolalic curmudgeon Simpson has done a service to the nation. He's drawn attention to the Commission, and to the anti-Social Security biases held by so many of its members - all of whom will retire in comfort, thanks to those whose benefits they would cut. It's the comfortable afflicting the afflicted.

If these Deficit Commission members want their recommendations to have any credibility, they should pledge to live on the same Social Security benefits that they would impose for other Americans. Better yet, they should dedicate themselves to helping provide every American with the kind of retirement security they enjoy. That was part of the social contract this nation embraced during its years of greatest economic growth, the fulfillment of a promise that a lifetime of work should never end with years of deprivation. They should be working to restore that contract, not erode it even further.

One thing is clear: This Commission has no business making recommendations about Social Security.

(Sign a petition asking Congress and the President to protect Social Security from the Deficit Commission. Roger Hickey has more here.)

Additional links:

* Sam Seder and I discussed Social Security this week while co-hosting The Young Turks.

* For further reference on the Commission's members and their biases, see Firedoglake and Talking Points Memo.

* House Democrats are vowing to protect Social Security from any cuts. The polls show why that's a very wise idea.

Events of the last week have made the Deficit Commission an embarrassment. Co-Chair Alan Simpson is a one-man disaster movie, compulsively offending one key voting bloc after another. Commission member Paul Ryan faced an angry crowd over his anti-Social Security stance, while another Commissioner locked experienced workers out of a nuclear facility rather than provide retirement benefits.

That's right: He's cutting retirement benefits.

But if the political blowback is obvious, here's what isn't: The Commissioners who are determined to cut your Social Security benefits are going to enjoy their own retirements in comfort. Their own pension plans insulate them from the fears that many other Americans face, and they don't have the professional expertise that would help them understand those concerns. In fact, the Commission's only expert on retirement is Rep. Jan Schakowsky, and she apparently opposes benefit cuts. The rest of the Commission is dominated by people who've expressed their desire to cut Social Security, despite their own secure futures. Millions of working Americans who have contributed to Social Security all their lives will lose out if these Commissioners have their way.

Happy Labor Day.

Normally I consider it off-limits to discuss people's personal finances when discussing their political opinions. But these Commissioners' lack of subject matter expertise, along with their lack of empathy, is important. If you don't know much about the topic and are protected from the problem, what makes you credible? Their pre-established prejudices makes the situation even worse, and their own situations underscore the irony of their self-professed willingness to make "brave choices" - choices whose consequences will mean little or nothing to them.

The Commission's Social Security obsession is odd anyway, since the projected Social Security shortfall comes out to only 0.7% of GDP. Nevertheless, these Commissioners have made their benefit-cutting intentions plain, presumably because they want to offer up America's seniors as a sacrifice to the bond markets. So how will these would-be income-slashers for the elderly make out in their own golden years? They'll be golden.

Consider Commissioner Alice Rivlin. Rivlin co-authored a paper that called for raising the retirement age and other benefit cuts, and recently released a specious paper about "Saving Social Security." As a former HEW Undersecretary, CBO Director, White House Budget Director, and Federal Reserve Vice Chair, she will presumably enjoy a comfortable retirement supported by multiple public pensions. Says Rivlin: ""We can't get out of this problem without doing both spending cuts, especially slowing the growth of entitlement, and tax increases."

Experts on Social Security finance (including the long-time Chief Actuary for the program) flatly disagree with Rivlin, pointing out that an adjustment to the payroll tax cap would unquestionably be enough to get the job done. They have the numbers to prove it. So why does Rivlin, who does not have their expertise in this area, disagree? Go ask Alice.

Co-Chair Erskine Bowles brokered a deal with Newt Gingrich to cut Social Security in the 1990s, when he served as Bill Clinton's Chief of Staff. Before that he headed the Small Business Administration, so his government tenure presumably qualifies him for a Federal pension. If not, don't worry: He receives $425,000 per year in his current job running the public universities of North Carolina, and the people of North Carolina are presumably also funding a pension on his behalf. To his credit, Bowles pledged to donate $125,000 of his salary for need-based student funds - but then, he can afford it. As the son of a US Congressman, Bowles had the education and connections needed to make millions as an investment banker. The added income he earns today as a Board member for General Motors and Morgan Stanley will help, too - and his government experience undoubtedly helped him win those positions, too.

Republican Rep. Paul Ryan, an aggressive advocate of Social Security cuts and privatization, will also enjoy his sunset years in comfort, thanks to a publicly-funded pension from his tenure as a Congressman. (He'll presumably earn even more as a result of his employment as an aide to two United States Senators.) Rep. Jeb Hensaerling has served as both a Representative and as an aide to Sen. Phil Gramm, so he should be safe from financial insecurity in his old age too .

The average annual pension payments for former members of Congress ranged from $41,000 to $55,000 in 2002, considerably more than the average $13,836 that Social Security recipients received in 2009. Yet neither Ryan nor Hensaerling have proposed cutting Congressional retirement benefits - nor should they. Sound pension plans like theirs were once available to most working Americans, and more effort should be made to restore them.

Former SEIU President Andrew Stern, who once might have been counted on to defend Social Security, recently sneered at Commission critics as "assassins of change" while saying that "all entitlements should be on the table." Mr. Stern's annual pension is $152,000 - and he retired at the age of 59, not 70. Nevertheless, Stern now publicly muses about "whether defined benefit pensions can really exist in the long run in a globalized economy."

Judd Gregg, who wants to raise the retirement age to 70, will receive a Federal pension for his Senate position. Gregg, like Alan Simpson, is the son of a Governor (self-made men, you might say), which means that public pensions also ensured that neither of them had to worry about supporting their aged parents. Tom Coburn, another would-be Social Security cutter, will receive a Congressional and Senatorial pension too.

David Cote, the CEO of Honeywell, provides some "private enterprise" perspective to the Commission's work. But Cote's wealth comes in part from Honeywell's government contracts, which exceed $4 billion annually. What's more, Cote's "free enterprise" ethic didn't stop him from making sure that Honeywell grabbed a few million in stimulus money from the taxpayers, too. A few billion from the Pentagon here, a few million more from Uncle Sam there - that'll plump up the nest egg a little for Mr. Cote's sunset years.

Cote made the headlines this week when Honeywell locked out the union workers at a nuclear power plant over a labor dispute - even though the workers agreed to stay on the job to protect public safety. Instead, Cote hired replacements and put them through a pared-down training process. The image of Homer Simpson comes to mind, pushing the wrong buttons and spilling beer on the reactor console - which would presumably make Cote Mr. Burns.

But it's no joking matter. Apparently there's real danger, which is why the Nuclear Regulatory Commission reportedly stepped in to block Honeywell from distilling uranium with its crew of replacement workers And what are the union and Honeywell arguing about? Honeywell's raising health care costs - and eliminating retiree pension plans for new workers.

That's right. A member of the Commission that's pretending to judge our retirement security with impartiality would rather have hastily-trained amateurs handle nuclear materials than bargain openly with his workers - about their retirement. D'oh!

As for Simpson (Alan, not Bart), to say that he suffers from "political Tourette's syndrome" would be a disservice to Tourette's sufferers. Most of them don't really say socially objectionable things, and those who do (it's called "coprolalia") don't mean what they say. But Simpson does. By attacking senior citizens as "greedy geezers," then offending women with his "milk cow with 100 million tits" comment, and now offending veterans' groups, Simpson has now hit the voting bloc trifecta.

And Cote's outraged labor, a fourth group. But the problem isn't Simpson anymore, or Cote for that matter. It's the Commission itself. The coprolalic curmudgeon Simpson has done a service to the nation. He's drawn attention to the Commission, and to the anti-Social Security biases held by so many of its members - all of whom will retire in comfort, thanks to those whose benefits they would cut. It's the comfortable afflicting the afflicted.

If these Deficit Commission members want their recommendations to have any credibility, they should pledge to live on the same Social Security benefits that they would impose for other Americans. Better yet, they should dedicate themselves to helping provide every American with the kind of retirement security they enjoy. That was part of the social contract this nation embraced during its years of greatest economic growth, the fulfillment of a promise that a lifetime of work should never end with years of deprivation. They should be working to restore that contract, not erode it even further.

One thing is clear: This Commission has no business making recommendations about Social Security.

(Sign a petition asking Congress and the President to protect Social Security from the Deficit Commission. Roger Hickey has more here.)

Additional links:

* Sam Seder and I discussed Social Security this week while co-hosting The Young Turks.

* For further reference on the Commission's members and their biases, see Firedoglake and Talking Points Memo.

* House Democrats are vowing to protect Social Security from any cuts. The polls show why that's a very wise idea.

bench craft company rip off

Cable <b>News</b> Ratings: Top 30 Programs In Q3 2010 (PHOTOS)

Fox News' domination of the cable news rankings continued in Q3, with the network holding its grip on the top 11 programs in cable news. How did individual shows do?

New York Times Backs <b>News</b>-Aggregation Software Company - Digits - WSJ

The New York Times Co. is joining a group of news organizations in backing the maker of software that helps publishers aggregate news, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Nintendo: 4m 3DS sales in first month 3DS <b>News</b> - Page 1 <b>...</b>

Read our 3DS news of Nintendo: 4m 3DS sales in first month.

bench craft company rip off benchcraft company scam

Cable <b>News</b> Ratings: Top 30 Programs In Q3 2010 (PHOTOS)

Fox News' domination of the cable news rankings continued in Q3, with the network holding its grip on the top 11 programs in cable news. How did individual shows do?

New York Times Backs <b>News</b>-Aggregation Software Company - Digits - WSJ

The New York Times Co. is joining a group of news organizations in backing the maker of software that helps publishers aggregate news, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Nintendo: 4m 3DS sales in first month 3DS <b>News</b> - Page 1 <b>...</b>

Read our 3DS news of Nintendo: 4m 3DS sales in first month.

benchcraft company scam bench craft company rip off

Cable <b>News</b> Ratings: Top 30 Programs In Q3 2010 (PHOTOS)

Fox News' domination of the cable news rankings continued in Q3, with the network holding its grip on the top 11 programs in cable news. How did individual shows do?

New York Times Backs <b>News</b>-Aggregation Software Company - Digits - WSJ

The New York Times Co. is joining a group of news organizations in backing the maker of software that helps publishers aggregate news, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Nintendo: 4m 3DS sales in first month 3DS <b>News</b> - Page 1 <b>...</b>

Read our 3DS news of Nintendo: 4m 3DS sales in first month.

benchcraft company scam

personal finance books

Come November, it is the intention to throw the bums out. All of them. Many Senate seat challengers, while running as Republicans, have risen to the top with backing from the "tea party." Wisconsin's Ron Johnson is just such a candidate. A fiscally conservative businessman, Johnson has never run for public office and is an inexperienced campaigner. But the way his rhetoric matches with fact, he already seems the pro. Ron Johnson can now distinguish the bum's face. That bum is incumbent Senator Russ Feingold.

Now campaign finance filings found by The Awl show that despite his vigorous denouncement of the bank bailouts, Johnson's campaign has received funding from many of the same banks who received bailouts. This means you and I have helped fund Ron Johnson's anti-bailout campaign. So we should get to know him.

Johnson has gladly taken the tea party badge. Back in May, Washington Post columnist and conservative icon George Will said Johnson "is what the Tea Party looks like." FreedomWorks, the Dick Armey-run conservative organization that organized the 9/12 rally in 2009 but is not at all behind many "grassroots" tea party events, called Johnson a “Champion of Freedom."

His website's rundown of his personal history ("Meet Ron") begins, "Ron grew up in a family and in a place where one of the greatest compliments you could give a person was to say that he or she was a hard worker." And it only gets more vague. Apparently, this is intentional. Johnson declined to meet Feingold in all six debates, agreeing to just three. That a long-time incumbent is challenging his newcomer to debates should immediately raise raise a red flag. Without detailed positions, what is there to specifically criticize? Johnson's campaign has taken to dismissing all criticisms of the candidate as typical political attack ads, even as Johnson's crew runs similar spots. This kind of electioneering doublethink infects Johnson's campaign, a rhetoric capable of forgetting whatever it's necessary to forget, only to draw it back into memory at the moment it is needed.

Johnson claims to be for freedom, his rallying cry being "First of all, freedom." But then he believes marriage can only be between a man and a woman.

He is passionate believer in the values of Rand's Atlas Shrugged. But not the book's fundamental view of the "monstrous absurdity" of original sin, as he is a fervent and active Lutheran who says "freedom of religion doesn’t mean freedom from religion."

Johnson has adopted an all-green design and logo, giving the impression that he is a friend of the environment. But he is fervent supporter of fossil fuels, defending BP against recent criticisms and calling climate change theories "lunacy" and "not proven by any stretch of the imagination.” (Johnson has suggested sunspots have caused recent weather changes, despite sunspots being at historic lows.)

Johnson demands a smaller, less-involved government, saying our current one is "robbing the bank accounts of future generations of Americans." But even while Johnson calls government spending and subsidies a "threat to our freedom" and insists "government doesn't create jobs," he refuses to acknowledge that his company received millions of dollars in industrial revenue bonds. Johnson's campaign maintains the money he received was not a government handout. Yet this exact form of government subsidized loan is what fiscal conservative temple The Cato Institute calls "corporate welfare."

As everyone debates whether or not this constitutes a government subsidy, the blog Uppity Wisconsin reveals Johnson's membership on the board of an industrial development corporation partly funded by the city and county that "has successfully helped area business apply for and secure over a million dollars in Customized Labor Training (CLT) grants… designed to assist companies that are investing in new technologies or manufacturing processes by providing a grant of up to 50% of the cost of training employees on the new technologies." Yet, Johnson insists that subsidization "doesn't work through the free market system very well."

Johnson could not be more different than Feingold when it comes to creativity and a voice for Wisconsin. Johnson is a voice for money. He admits as much, saying of Wisconsin's loss of manufacturing jobs to NAFTA "there are always winners and losers." For a candidate who complains about a private sector tax base, those "losers" include the 177,000-odd manufacturing jobs Wisconsin has lost in the last decade; that's 177,000 incomes that paid taxes.

From a GOP perspective, he is a midterm wet dream. Giving all the appearance of the throw-the-bums-out attitude of the zeitgeist, Johnson has nonetheless endorsed all the old bums' ideas about how to fix things. For health care Johnson says "Mitch Daniels has the solution," referring to the incumbent Indiana GOP Governor. On taxes, Johnson points to old-school GOP insider Ronald Reagan. Johnson has said that during Reagan's era, the top income rate of 28 percent meant "we were 72 percent free," which suggests Johnson may endorse a complete elimination of the income tax.

For solutions to entitlement reform, Johnson points to fellow Wisconsinite and incumbent GOP Congressman Paul Ryan. (It's noteworthy that while Johnson castigates opponent Feingold for being a career politician, he reveres Congressman Ryan, whose never held a job outside government since graduating college in 1992. Spectacular doublethink).

The greatest doublethink of all is the impression that Johnson is a self-made millionaire, that thanks to the opportunities provided by the American Dream, he pulled himself up by his bootstraps, an example of how America can reward hard-working citizens. On his website, the story goes that after moving to Wisconsin "Ron started a business called Pacur with his brother-in-law" and he has said he built his business from "from scratch," from "the ground up." But what Johnson's campaign doesn't often mention is that the candidate was set up with the business by his billionaire father-in-law. Uppity Wisconsin has unearthed evidence that Johnson's firm Pacur is the beneficiary of less-than-market-driven business from its main client, Daddy Inc.

Reading a candidate's website for his position papers is for suckers. To really understand how a candidate will vote, one needs to be in on the fund-raising calls he or she spends the majority of the day performing. Since that's impossible, the next best thing is to look at which of those calls were successful. Where each candidate stands is directly defined by the money trail.

Russ Feingold's Federal Election Commission report reads like a who's who of labor. American Maritime Officers Voluntary PAC. American Dental Association PAC. Alliant Energy Corporation Employees PAC. Air Conditioning Contractors of America PAC. Committee on Letter Carriers PAC (yes, this exists). Association of Postmasters. Amalgamated Transit Union. Writers Guild. Sheet Metal Workers. Air Traffic Controllers. United Brotherhood of Carpenters. American Nurses. Optometric Association. Assisted Living Federation. Associated Milk Producers. Boilermakers. Longshoremen. Walt Disney Productions Employees PAC. Bricklayers. Even the PAC from Awl friends the Human Rights Committee supports Feingold (since 1997).

Meanwhile, Ron Johnson has largely self-funded his campaign, running three TV ads for each one of Feingold's. When asked how much of his fortune he will spend to defeat Feingold, Johnson has said, "All of it." He's off to a good start, spending $4.4 million in the run-up to the primary, or about $9 per vote. That's a lot more than the many thousands of dollars both he and his wife gave in 2004 to Feingold's GOP challenger, Tim Michels.

Johnson doesn't really need the $5,000-odd donations brought in by his committee, Ron Johnson for Senate Inc. That's why looking at his list of donors is even more telling. A newcomer, Johnson's list of financial supporters is short; but it includes the American Bankers PAC, American Express Company PAC, American Insurance Association PAC, Deloitte & Touche PAC, Financial Services Roundtable PAC, National Venture Capital Association PAC, and the Exxon Mobil PAC. The last of those donors recently got Mr. Johnson in some trouble when it was revealed that all his defense of oil exploration in the Gulf, and his criticism of the Obama Administration's treatment of BP, might be because he personally holds hundreds of thousands of dollars in BP and Exxon stock.

Much like many of this year's tea party-associated GOP candidates, one of Johnson's core campaign points is criticism of the financial bailout. Funny then that Johnson's campaign has been the beneficiary of the largess of the very corporations he believes should not have received bailout money.

For example, the cash Johnson received from the Financial Services Roundtable PAC on August 27 and the American Bankers Association PAC on July 8 and July 30 came from, amongst others, hardcore Treasury bailout beneficiaries such as JP Morgan Chase, SunTrust, Bank of America, Regions Financial, Zions and First Horizon. The money Ron Johnson received from the Bluegrass and Senate Majority Fund PACs came, in part, from one of the greatest bailout beneficiaries of them all, Goldman Sachs. Despite statements about staying out of politics this cycle, Goldman donated to both PACs on March 31 of this year. On June 24, Ron Johnson's campaign received two $5,000 donations from the Bluegrass PAC, a day later the campaign received two donations from the Senate Majority PAC in the same amounts.

To be clear, while it may not be the backbone of his funding, some of the very bailout money that Ron Johnson has criticized is now funding his campaign.

Tea Party members might also be interested to know that some of the $2,700 PAC donation he received on August 27 came from Sallie Mae.

Johnson's campaign ignored repeated requests from The Awl for comment.

Johnson has, and will continue to, paint Feingold as a Washington D.C. insider. But would a Democratic insider have voted against dismissing President Clinton's impeachment proceedings? Feingold did.

When it comes to true politician insiders, potential Johnson supporters should ask about his connections to Americans for Prosperity's old Republican establishment strategist Mark Block. State political blog One Wisconsin Now even makes a good case for how Johnson worked with supporters to actually diminish true grassroots tea party involvement after former Governor Tommy Thompson dropped out of the race. Johnson's dismissal of Wisconsin tea party groups and alignment with Americans for Prosperity's tea party is a microcosm of how the entire movement has been clandestinely hijacked by the GOP. And those who genuinely are grassroots tea party patriots should be worried about Johnson's connection to the retail version of their movement. As One Wisconsin Now also just uncovered, Americans for Prosperity, along with Republican party leaders, are dragging the tea party reputation into good old GOP voter suppression tactics.

The great irony of course is that the newly angry who long for fiscal reason and weep for the Constitution, those who have become the "party of no," could not have a greater ally than Russ Feingold.

Feingold voted against the 2008 TARP bailout. In fact, he voted against the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, which in large part caused the need for the bailout. He voted against NAFTA. And just days after 9/11 and at the height of that event's fervor, Feingold hauled his giant balls up to the voting machine and registered a nay vote against the "USA Patriot Act" on the grounds that "The Founders who wrote our Constitution and Bill of Rights exercised that vigilance even though they had recently fought and won the Revolutionary War. They did not live in comfortable and easy times of hypothetical enemies. They wrote a Constitution of limited powers and an explicit Bill of Rights to protect liberty in times of war, as well as in times of peace." He was the only senator to vote no. By all means, read his full remarks in the wake of the vote and ask yourself why Russ Feingold isn't getting speaking invites for tea party rallies.

The once-progressive Republican Wisconsin Idea may have suffered greatly of late, broken and ill, slouching toward yore. But the election of Ron Johnson over Russ Feingold would be the ultimate blade run across its throat.

George Will's backseat make-out session with Johnson in May heavily leaned on Atlas Shrugged symbolism, noting it was Johnson's favorite book. Will noted Johnson's belief that we are already living in the "novel's dystopian world."

When newspeak replaces debate and the nation's vocabulary gets smaller every election cycle, where doublethink goes unquestioned by voters, we are indeed sliding into a novel's dystopian world, but it wasn't written by Ayn Rand.

Abe Sauer is enjoying autumn in Wisconsin.

Photo by WiscPolitics.com via Flickr

In fact, it’s these piles of personal-finance books that have prompted me to make this week Book Week at Get Rich Slowly. I used to review several books each month, but I’ve only reviewed a handful in 2010. This week, I’ll review some of the books I’ve read recently (though not Lonesome Dove), and the GRS staff writers will each review a book, too.

As part of Book Week, I want to do something about the pile of personal-finance books on the floor of my office. I’m not in the mood to wade through the legalities that go along with a contest, so I’ll probably just make it simple by giving them away. I’ll sort through my extra books over the next couple of days, and later in the week I’ll do some sort of give-away.

The only thing I know for sure: In order for me to consider sending you a book, you must have a previously-published comment on this site. I’m not going to send books to first-time commenters. (Why not? Because these folks are often just swinging by from other sites because they’ve heard they can get something free.) So, if you think you might want a book, be sure to comment on one of the upcoming book reviews or on an article from the archives.

That’s it for now. Tune in tomorrow for reviews of The Art of Non-Conformity and The Simple Dollar.

Brad Friedman and Desi Doyen: Green <b>News</b> Report: September 28 <b>...</b>

IN 'GREEN NEWS EXTRA' (see links below): Halliburton Makes the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (and pigs fly); More than 100 Arrested at White House Demanding End to Mountaintop Removal; Australian climate activists close down world's ...

SwitchEasy intros CapsuleRebel for iPhone 4 | iLounge <b>News</b>

iLounge news discussing the SwitchEasy intros CapsuleRebel for iPhone 4. Find more iPhone Accessories news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.

The Good <b>News</b> About RIM&#39;s BlackBerry PlayBook: It&#39;s Not A Complete <b>...</b>

The bad news: It's going to have to compete with next year's iPad, not the current one.

halloween costumes

Brad Friedman and Desi Doyen: Green <b>News</b> Report: September 28 <b>...</b>

IN 'GREEN NEWS EXTRA' (see links below): Halliburton Makes the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (and pigs fly); More than 100 Arrested at White House Demanding End to Mountaintop Removal; Australian climate activists close down world's ...

SwitchEasy intros CapsuleRebel for iPhone 4 | iLounge <b>News</b>

iLounge news discussing the SwitchEasy intros CapsuleRebel for iPhone 4. Find more iPhone Accessories news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.

The Good <b>News</b> About RIM&#39;s BlackBerry PlayBook: It&#39;s Not A Complete <b>...</b>

The bad news: It's going to have to compete with next year's iPad, not the current one.

Come November, it is the intention to throw the bums out. All of them. Many Senate seat challengers, while running as Republicans, have risen to the top with backing from the "tea party." Wisconsin's Ron Johnson is just such a candidate. A fiscally conservative businessman, Johnson has never run for public office and is an inexperienced campaigner. But the way his rhetoric matches with fact, he already seems the pro. Ron Johnson can now distinguish the bum's face. That bum is incumbent Senator Russ Feingold.

Now campaign finance filings found by The Awl show that despite his vigorous denouncement of the bank bailouts, Johnson's campaign has received funding from many of the same banks who received bailouts. This means you and I have helped fund Ron Johnson's anti-bailout campaign. So we should get to know him.

Johnson has gladly taken the tea party badge. Back in May, Washington Post columnist and conservative icon George Will said Johnson "is what the Tea Party looks like." FreedomWorks, the Dick Armey-run conservative organization that organized the 9/12 rally in 2009 but is not at all behind many "grassroots" tea party events, called Johnson a “Champion of Freedom."

His website's rundown of his personal history ("Meet Ron") begins, "Ron grew up in a family and in a place where one of the greatest compliments you could give a person was to say that he or she was a hard worker." And it only gets more vague. Apparently, this is intentional. Johnson declined to meet Feingold in all six debates, agreeing to just three. That a long-time incumbent is challenging his newcomer to debates should immediately raise raise a red flag. Without detailed positions, what is there to specifically criticize? Johnson's campaign has taken to dismissing all criticisms of the candidate as typical political attack ads, even as Johnson's crew runs similar spots. This kind of electioneering doublethink infects Johnson's campaign, a rhetoric capable of forgetting whatever it's necessary to forget, only to draw it back into memory at the moment it is needed.

Johnson claims to be for freedom, his rallying cry being "First of all, freedom." But then he believes marriage can only be between a man and a woman.

He is passionate believer in the values of Rand's Atlas Shrugged. But not the book's fundamental view of the "monstrous absurdity" of original sin, as he is a fervent and active Lutheran who says "freedom of religion doesn’t mean freedom from religion."

Johnson has adopted an all-green design and logo, giving the impression that he is a friend of the environment. But he is fervent supporter of fossil fuels, defending BP against recent criticisms and calling climate change theories "lunacy" and "not proven by any stretch of the imagination.” (Johnson has suggested sunspots have caused recent weather changes, despite sunspots being at historic lows.)

Johnson demands a smaller, less-involved government, saying our current one is "robbing the bank accounts of future generations of Americans." But even while Johnson calls government spending and subsidies a "threat to our freedom" and insists "government doesn't create jobs," he refuses to acknowledge that his company received millions of dollars in industrial revenue bonds. Johnson's campaign maintains the money he received was not a government handout. Yet this exact form of government subsidized loan is what fiscal conservative temple The Cato Institute calls "corporate welfare."

As everyone debates whether or not this constitutes a government subsidy, the blog Uppity Wisconsin reveals Johnson's membership on the board of an industrial development corporation partly funded by the city and county that "has successfully helped area business apply for and secure over a million dollars in Customized Labor Training (CLT) grants… designed to assist companies that are investing in new technologies or manufacturing processes by providing a grant of up to 50% of the cost of training employees on the new technologies." Yet, Johnson insists that subsidization "doesn't work through the free market system very well."

Johnson could not be more different than Feingold when it comes to creativity and a voice for Wisconsin. Johnson is a voice for money. He admits as much, saying of Wisconsin's loss of manufacturing jobs to NAFTA "there are always winners and losers." For a candidate who complains about a private sector tax base, those "losers" include the 177,000-odd manufacturing jobs Wisconsin has lost in the last decade; that's 177,000 incomes that paid taxes.

From a GOP perspective, he is a midterm wet dream. Giving all the appearance of the throw-the-bums-out attitude of the zeitgeist, Johnson has nonetheless endorsed all the old bums' ideas about how to fix things. For health care Johnson says "Mitch Daniels has the solution," referring to the incumbent Indiana GOP Governor. On taxes, Johnson points to old-school GOP insider Ronald Reagan. Johnson has said that during Reagan's era, the top income rate of 28 percent meant "we were 72 percent free," which suggests Johnson may endorse a complete elimination of the income tax.

For solutions to entitlement reform, Johnson points to fellow Wisconsinite and incumbent GOP Congressman Paul Ryan. (It's noteworthy that while Johnson castigates opponent Feingold for being a career politician, he reveres Congressman Ryan, whose never held a job outside government since graduating college in 1992. Spectacular doublethink).

The greatest doublethink of all is the impression that Johnson is a self-made millionaire, that thanks to the opportunities provided by the American Dream, he pulled himself up by his bootstraps, an example of how America can reward hard-working citizens. On his website, the story goes that after moving to Wisconsin "Ron started a business called Pacur with his brother-in-law" and he has said he built his business from "from scratch," from "the ground up." But what Johnson's campaign doesn't often mention is that the candidate was set up with the business by his billionaire father-in-law. Uppity Wisconsin has unearthed evidence that Johnson's firm Pacur is the beneficiary of less-than-market-driven business from its main client, Daddy Inc.

Reading a candidate's website for his position papers is for suckers. To really understand how a candidate will vote, one needs to be in on the fund-raising calls he or she spends the majority of the day performing. Since that's impossible, the next best thing is to look at which of those calls were successful. Where each candidate stands is directly defined by the money trail.

Russ Feingold's Federal Election Commission report reads like a who's who of labor. American Maritime Officers Voluntary PAC. American Dental Association PAC. Alliant Energy Corporation Employees PAC. Air Conditioning Contractors of America PAC. Committee on Letter Carriers PAC (yes, this exists). Association of Postmasters. Amalgamated Transit Union. Writers Guild. Sheet Metal Workers. Air Traffic Controllers. United Brotherhood of Carpenters. American Nurses. Optometric Association. Assisted Living Federation. Associated Milk Producers. Boilermakers. Longshoremen. Walt Disney Productions Employees PAC. Bricklayers. Even the PAC from Awl friends the Human Rights Committee supports Feingold (since 1997).

Meanwhile, Ron Johnson has largely self-funded his campaign, running three TV ads for each one of Feingold's. When asked how much of his fortune he will spend to defeat Feingold, Johnson has said, "All of it." He's off to a good start, spending $4.4 million in the run-up to the primary, or about $9 per vote. That's a lot more than the many thousands of dollars both he and his wife gave in 2004 to Feingold's GOP challenger, Tim Michels.

Johnson doesn't really need the $5,000-odd donations brought in by his committee, Ron Johnson for Senate Inc. That's why looking at his list of donors is even more telling. A newcomer, Johnson's list of financial supporters is short; but it includes the American Bankers PAC, American Express Company PAC, American Insurance Association PAC, Deloitte & Touche PAC, Financial Services Roundtable PAC, National Venture Capital Association PAC, and the Exxon Mobil PAC. The last of those donors recently got Mr. Johnson in some trouble when it was revealed that all his defense of oil exploration in the Gulf, and his criticism of the Obama Administration's treatment of BP, might be because he personally holds hundreds of thousands of dollars in BP and Exxon stock.

Much like many of this year's tea party-associated GOP candidates, one of Johnson's core campaign points is criticism of the financial bailout. Funny then that Johnson's campaign has been the beneficiary of the largess of the very corporations he believes should not have received bailout money.

For example, the cash Johnson received from the Financial Services Roundtable PAC on August 27 and the American Bankers Association PAC on July 8 and July 30 came from, amongst others, hardcore Treasury bailout beneficiaries such as JP Morgan Chase, SunTrust, Bank of America, Regions Financial, Zions and First Horizon. The money Ron Johnson received from the Bluegrass and Senate Majority Fund PACs came, in part, from one of the greatest bailout beneficiaries of them all, Goldman Sachs. Despite statements about staying out of politics this cycle, Goldman donated to both PACs on March 31 of this year. On June 24, Ron Johnson's campaign received two $5,000 donations from the Bluegrass PAC, a day later the campaign received two donations from the Senate Majority PAC in the same amounts.

To be clear, while it may not be the backbone of his funding, some of the very bailout money that Ron Johnson has criticized is now funding his campaign.

Tea Party members might also be interested to know that some of the $2,700 PAC donation he received on August 27 came from Sallie Mae.

Johnson's campaign ignored repeated requests from The Awl for comment.

Johnson has, and will continue to, paint Feingold as a Washington D.C. insider. But would a Democratic insider have voted against dismissing President Clinton's impeachment proceedings? Feingold did.

When it comes to true politician insiders, potential Johnson supporters should ask about his connections to Americans for Prosperity's old Republican establishment strategist Mark Block. State political blog One Wisconsin Now even makes a good case for how Johnson worked with supporters to actually diminish true grassroots tea party involvement after former Governor Tommy Thompson dropped out of the race. Johnson's dismissal of Wisconsin tea party groups and alignment with Americans for Prosperity's tea party is a microcosm of how the entire movement has been clandestinely hijacked by the GOP. And those who genuinely are grassroots tea party patriots should be worried about Johnson's connection to the retail version of their movement. As One Wisconsin Now also just uncovered, Americans for Prosperity, along with Republican party leaders, are dragging the tea party reputation into good old GOP voter suppression tactics.

The great irony of course is that the newly angry who long for fiscal reason and weep for the Constitution, those who have become the "party of no," could not have a greater ally than Russ Feingold.

Feingold voted against the 2008 TARP bailout. In fact, he voted against the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, which in large part caused the need for the bailout. He voted against NAFTA. And just days after 9/11 and at the height of that event's fervor, Feingold hauled his giant balls up to the voting machine and registered a nay vote against the "USA Patriot Act" on the grounds that "The Founders who wrote our Constitution and Bill of Rights exercised that vigilance even though they had recently fought and won the Revolutionary War. They did not live in comfortable and easy times of hypothetical enemies. They wrote a Constitution of limited powers and an explicit Bill of Rights to protect liberty in times of war, as well as in times of peace." He was the only senator to vote no. By all means, read his full remarks in the wake of the vote and ask yourself why Russ Feingold isn't getting speaking invites for tea party rallies.

The once-progressive Republican Wisconsin Idea may have suffered greatly of late, broken and ill, slouching toward yore. But the election of Ron Johnson over Russ Feingold would be the ultimate blade run across its throat.

George Will's backseat make-out session with Johnson in May heavily leaned on Atlas Shrugged symbolism, noting it was Johnson's favorite book. Will noted Johnson's belief that we are already living in the "novel's dystopian world."

When newspeak replaces debate and the nation's vocabulary gets smaller every election cycle, where doublethink goes unquestioned by voters, we are indeed sliding into a novel's dystopian world, but it wasn't written by Ayn Rand.

Abe Sauer is enjoying autumn in Wisconsin.

Photo by WiscPolitics.com via Flickr

In fact, it’s these piles of personal-finance books that have prompted me to make this week Book Week at Get Rich Slowly. I used to review several books each month, but I’ve only reviewed a handful in 2010. This week, I’ll review some of the books I’ve read recently (though not Lonesome Dove), and the GRS staff writers will each review a book, too.

As part of Book Week, I want to do something about the pile of personal-finance books on the floor of my office. I’m not in the mood to wade through the legalities that go along with a contest, so I’ll probably just make it simple by giving them away. I’ll sort through my extra books over the next couple of days, and later in the week I’ll do some sort of give-away.

The only thing I know for sure: In order for me to consider sending you a book, you must have a previously-published comment on this site. I’m not going to send books to first-time commenters. (Why not? Because these folks are often just swinging by from other sites because they’ve heard they can get something free.) So, if you think you might want a book, be sure to comment on one of the upcoming book reviews or on an article from the archives.

That’s it for now. Tune in tomorrow for reviews of The Art of Non-Conformity and The Simple Dollar.

corporate reputation management company

Brad Friedman and Desi Doyen: Green <b>News</b> Report: September 28 <b>...</b>

IN 'GREEN NEWS EXTRA' (see links below): Halliburton Makes the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (and pigs fly); More than 100 Arrested at White House Demanding End to Mountaintop Removal; Australian climate activists close down world's ...

SwitchEasy intros CapsuleRebel for iPhone 4 | iLounge <b>News</b>

iLounge news discussing the SwitchEasy intros CapsuleRebel for iPhone 4. Find more iPhone Accessories news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.

The Good <b>News</b> About RIM&#39;s BlackBerry PlayBook: It&#39;s Not A Complete <b>...</b>

The bad news: It's going to have to compete with next year's iPad, not the current one.

eric seiger

Brad Friedman and Desi Doyen: Green <b>News</b> Report: September 28 <b>...</b>

IN 'GREEN NEWS EXTRA' (see links below): Halliburton Makes the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (and pigs fly); More than 100 Arrested at White House Demanding End to Mountaintop Removal; Australian climate activists close down world's ...

SwitchEasy intros CapsuleRebel for iPhone 4 | iLounge <b>News</b>

iLounge news discussing the SwitchEasy intros CapsuleRebel for iPhone 4. Find more iPhone Accessories news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.

The Good <b>News</b> About RIM&#39;s BlackBerry PlayBook: It&#39;s Not A Complete <b>...</b>

The bad news: It's going to have to compete with next year's iPad, not the current one.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_18/b4032066.htm

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_18/b4032066.htm

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_18/b4032066.htm

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1999/10/25/267811/index.htm

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1999/10/25/267811/index.htm

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1999/10/25/267811/index.htm

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_18/b4032066.htm

how to manage personal finances

This post is from staff writer Sierra Black. Sierra writes about frugality, sustainable living, and getting her kids to eat kale at Childwild.com. This post is part of Book Week at Get Rich Slowly.

Since my twin victories of paying off our last credit card and funding a summer of travel, my husband has begun to show interest in personal finance.

It’s not that he wasn’t supportive of my efforts before — he just preferred to support them from a safe, ignorant distance. A distance from which I handed him an envelope of cash each week to do the grocery shopping, he didn’t ask too many questions, and somehow we were climbing out of debt. He was more than happy to adopt any frugal-living strategy I suggested, as long as he didn’t have to think about the Big Picture.

That system worked, but I longed for more active participation from him. Not only because I wanted us to share equally in the journey toward financial freedom — I do want that — but also for a selfish reason. I wanted him to participate because he’s better at this stuff than I am. He’s a whiz at spreadsheets. The man has a Ph.d in Physical Chemistry. You don’t get one of those without doing a few math problems.

Lately, I’ve been getting my wish. My husband has been talking with a financial advisor at the university he works for, and having clear, honest conversations with me about our money.

This seemed like the perfect time for me to read Mary Hunt’s How to Debt-Proof Your Marriage.

Relationship first

Hunt’s book covers the basics of personal finance and debt destruction, with a special focus on doing it as a couple. Before she even begins talking about financial management, Hunt talks about strengthening the foundations of your marriage. You can’t have financial harmony without emotional intimacy, she says.

I couldn’t agree more. It’s clear in my own marriage that spending time relaxing together on vacation helped my husband and me both chill out and have better conversations during our family finance meetings too.

Hunt and I part ways in the chapters about how to achieve that emotional intimacy, though. She bases her prescription for marital bliss on traditional gender roles. She includes chapters for each sex on how to make deposits in the other’s Love Bank — a metaphorical bank of goodwill made of small, loving gestures.

The Love Bank is an adorable idea, one I’m tempted to put into practice here in my own home. I’m pretty sure I won’t be making my deposits to my husband’s Love Bank by biting my tongue when I disagree with him, though. Likewise, I don’t expect him to express his love for me by bringing me flowers and handling all the tough decisions for me like the natural leader of our family should.

Hunt is a generation (or two) older than I am, and what works for her marriage is so foreign to my young, feminist mind that it was actually a little hard to read. But leaving aside the details of how you get to an intimate marriage, though, she and I agree wholeheartedly that it’s important to get your emotional needs met before you can effectively work together with your spouse to manage your finances.

Money second

The personal-finance half of the book will be familiar to most GRS readers. Hunt advocates an approach similar to Your Money or Your Life and Dave Ramsey’s Total Money Makeover, one that begins with calculating your net worth and tracking your expenses. From there, she covers the basics of setting up an emergency fund, creating a spending plan, and starting a debt snowball (though she uses different terms for these steps).

Like her ideal of a healthy relationship, Hunt’s financial advice seems a little dated in places. A lot of it has to do with how to organize your three-ring binders, or how to painstakingly accomplish by-hand calculations that Mint can do for you in a few minutes. If you’re a devotee of the pen-and-paper approach, though, her chapters on how to track and plan your spending are rock solid and detailed enough to easily follow.

The one thing in this book that made me want to put it down, run to my office, and implement it on the spot was, in fact, her filing system. Hunt takes a few pages to go over exactly what personal records you should be keeping, and outlines an elegant effective way to organize them. I spent an hour tearing apart my filing cabinet yesterday as soon as I read those pages. I may not want my marriage to look much like hers, but I’m delighted to have made over my filing cabinet in Mary Hunt’s image.

Different views

There are a few areas where Mary’s financial advice deviates from the usual Get Rich Slowly formula. One is the matter of the debt snowball. She encourages readers to start saving 10% of their income towards an emergency fund immediately, while still paying the minimums on their credit cards. Only after saving up a fully funded six-month emergency fund would Hunt advise you to roll those savings into your credit card payments.

Given the relative interest rates on credit cards and savings accounts, this approach will almost certainly cost you money. If it works for you psychologically, though, by all means pursue it. No matter what order you do them in, the key steps of tracking your spending, creating an emergency fund, and snowballing your debt payments will lead you to financial security.

Another place where she breaks with conventional wisdom is in her savings and spending ratios. GRS readers are familiar with the Balanced Money Formula that encourages us to use 50% of our money for living expenses, 30% for fun and 20% for savings. Hunt advises 10% for giving, 10% for saving and 80% for spending.

The order of those percentages is vital to her. A devout Christian, Hunt feels that all the money that comes into your life is a blessing from God, and promptly giving 10% of it back to God shows you can be trusted with this blessing, and more of it will come your way.

I’m not a Christian, but I admire Mary’s faith and devotion to charitable giving. It’s a goal of mine to give 10% of my income. I’ve written about that here before, and readers made a persuasive case for waiting until my debts were paid before giving so much away. For now, I give a modest amount and look forward to giving more in the future.

I think that for Hunt, the psychological benefits of giving 10% and saving 10% before you make any spending decisions at all outweigh the financial benefits of paying off your debts as fast as possible and then beginning to accumulate and donate wealth.

It’s an interesting approach, and one that might work for a lot of people. Particularly if you’re a devoted Christian and looking for a personal-finance book that reflects your values, you’ll find a lot of good in How to Debt-Proof Your Marriage. If you’re looking for a book that’s totally focused on financial savvy and relationship skills, though, this might not be your best bet.

From Hotline (HT: Mataconis):

O'Donnell, a perennial conservative candidate in Delaware, is challenging moderate Rep. Mike Castle (R), the clear favorite of the GOP establishment. But she has come under fire recently for her personal financial problems. Reports have surfaced that she owed $10K in back taxes, defaulted on her mortgage and holds outstanding campaign debt.

Levi Russell, a spokesman for the group, told Hotline On Call that the group was not aware of O'Donnell's personal financial problems before it endorsed her.

"We don't know the exact situation," he said.

When asked if the group discussed the issues with O'Donnell, Russell responded: "No we haven't. We don't really have any contact with the campaign or the candidate."

We have blogged before reasons why we support Mike Castle over O'Donnell. But this report raises even more questions, such as:

1. If the Tea Party really stands for fiscal conservatism, why would they endorse somebody who can't even manage her personal finances?


2. Does it give you confidence in the Tea Party that they go around endorsing people without having any contact with the candidate? How do they know that this female version of Harold Stassen is really worthy of such an endorsement?


3. Christine O'Donnell has run for office 4 times. Her sole victory was an uncontested Republican primary.


4. In 2008, O'Donnell lost the Delaware senate race to Joe Biden by 65-35. She later falsely claimed to have won two counties in that race. Biden's percentage of the vote in 2008 was the largest of any of his senatorial campaigns.


5. In 2008, one of the great Democratic landslides, Mike Castle beat his Democratic challenger for Delaware's sole Congressional seat by 23 points. Castle has won 13 consecutive state-wide races as a candidate either for Governor or Congressman. He's way ahead of the Democrat in the polls while O'Donnell trails the Democrat by 10 points.

As a student of Delaware corporate governance, I am firmly convinced that Delaware needs quality representation in Congress if it is to fend off the creeping federalization of corporate law. As a big tent Republican, I'm inclined to support smart, electable, centrists like Mike Castle over someone like O'Donnell. The perfect must not be allowed to become the enemy of the good. Especially when the supposed perfect candidate is pretty seriously flawed and probably unelectable.

no big white booty

<b>News</b> - Lindsay Lohan Going Back to Jail Until Oct. 22 - Celebrity <b>...</b>

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Elden S. Fox revokes her probation for failing at least one drug test.

Ngmoco releases We City | iLounge <b>News</b>

iLounge news discussing the Ngmoco releases We City. Find more Apps + Games news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.

Michelle Williams Looks Really Skinny At Fashion Week - Starpulse.com

We spotted singer Michelle Williams out and about during London Fashion Week wearing a sparkly silver shift dress with matching heels. Does she look too thin? Her arms look like they could snap lik...

<b>News</b> - Lindsay Lohan Going Back to Jail Until Oct. 22 - Celebrity <b>...</b>

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Elden S. Fox revokes her probation for failing at least one drug test.

Ngmoco releases We City | iLounge <b>News</b>

iLounge news discussing the Ngmoco releases We City. Find more Apps + Games news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.

Michelle Williams Looks Really Skinny At Fashion Week - Starpulse.com

We spotted singer Michelle Williams out and about during London Fashion Week wearing a sparkly silver shift dress with matching heels. Does she look too thin? Her arms look like they could snap lik...

big white booty

<b>News</b> - Lindsay Lohan Going Back to Jail Until Oct. 22 - Celebrity <b>...</b>

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Elden S. Fox revokes her probation for failing at least one drug test.

Ngmoco releases We City | iLounge <b>News</b>

iLounge news discussing the Ngmoco releases We City. Find more Apps + Games news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.

Michelle Williams Looks Really Skinny At Fashion Week - Starpulse.com

We spotted singer Michelle Williams out and about during London Fashion Week wearing a sparkly silver shift dress with matching heels. Does she look too thin? Her arms look like they could snap lik...

managing personal finances

Are you a fan of the GTD personal productivity system? Well if you like "Getting Things Done," here's GFD, Getting Finances Done, which shows you how to map David Allen's same principals to managing your personal finance and achieving your financial goals.

Applying GTD principles to your personal finances - Part 1 [Getting Finances Done]

Are you a fan of the GTD personal productivity system? Well if you like "Getting Things Done," here's GFD, Getting Finances Done, which shows you how to map David Allen's same principals to managing your personal finance and achieving your financial goals.

Applying GTD principles to your personal finances - Part 1 [Getting Finances Done]

bluecross big white booty

<b>News</b> - Lindsay Lohan Going Back to Jail Until Oct. 22 - Celebrity <b>...</b>

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Elden S. Fox revokes her probation for failing at least one drug test.

Artnet <b>News</b>: Gang assaults Turkish galleries. Plus, Miami <b>...</b>

ARTNET NEWS. Gang assaults Turkish galleries. Plus, Miami Sculpture Biennial, Prospect 1.5 New Orleans, more.

Small Business <b>News</b>: An Owner&#39;s Manual

If only there were an owner's manual that came with your small business telling you what works, what doesn't and what are the best ways to move ahead in your.

<b>News</b> - Lindsay Lohan Going Back to Jail Until Oct. 22 - Celebrity <b>...</b>

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Elden S. Fox revokes her probation for failing at least one drug test.

Artnet <b>News</b>: Gang assaults Turkish galleries. Plus, Miami <b>...</b>

ARTNET NEWS. Gang assaults Turkish galleries. Plus, Miami Sculpture Biennial, Prospect 1.5 New Orleans, more.

Small Business <b>News</b>: An Owner&#39;s Manual

If only there were an owner's manual that came with your small business telling you what works, what doesn't and what are the best ways to move ahead in your.

big white booty

<b>News</b> - Lindsay Lohan Going Back to Jail Until Oct. 22 - Celebrity <b>...</b>

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Elden S. Fox revokes her probation for failing at least one drug test.

Artnet <b>News</b>: Gang assaults Turkish galleries. Plus, Miami <b>...</b>

ARTNET NEWS. Gang assaults Turkish galleries. Plus, Miami Sculpture Biennial, Prospect 1.5 New Orleans, more.

Small Business <b>News</b>: An Owner&#39;s Manual

If only there were an owner's manual that came with your small business telling you what works, what doesn't and what are the best ways to move ahead in your.