Mar 222011
 

22kucinichI like Dennis Kucinich.  I think he is an invaluable part of the Progressive Caucus in the house.  Early in the campaign for the 2008 Democratic nomination, I ranked the Democrats in the order of Edwards (oops), Kucinich, Clinton, and Obama.  I loked Obama too, but I did not think he could overcome American racism.  I sure called that wrong!  Then Dennis had what I call his Ron Paul moment, a lapse that prevents me from ever supporting Dennis beyond his current role.  Sadly, he just had another one.

In Dennis’ original Ron Paul moment, he endorsed Ron Paul as his potential running mate, solely because Paul opposed war.  For Dennis to ignore Paul’s lifetime history of racism, both overt and covert, and his intent to completely undo the safety net for America’s most needy citizens showed me that he is not capable of seeing the landscape beyond his antiwar sentiment.

When Barack Obama decided to commit troops to protecting Libyan citizens, I decided to endorse the decision, but not without reservations.  I respect the opinions that differ from mine, and do not believe that people that oppose that decision should stifle their views to support Obama, because he is our commander in chief.  However, for Kucinich to suggest that Obama’s decision is an impeachable offense is over the top, a second Ron Paul moment.  And to go on the Republican Ministry of Propaganda, to be interviewed by arch liar, Bill O’Reilly, is an unconscionable act on his part.

First, military action has been undertaken on multiple occasions by Presidents of both parties, but Congress has not declared war since 1941.  The Constitutionality of such actions is a matter for legal scholars, but one cannot say that Obama did so without precedent.  If Congress wants to demand that no military action be exercised by the Commander in Chief, in the absence of a formal declaration of war, they should replace the War Powers Resolution with legislation to that effect.

At the time that the Obama administration made the decision, after the UN Resolution, mandating action against Gaddafi, Congress was not in session, Obama did notify the leadership of both the House and the Senate.  He gave the formal notification required on Sunday.  Therefore he must withdraw US troops within 60 days in the absence of Congressional approval.

Obama may be right about the Constitutionality of his actions, because the action is based on the UN Charter, and the Constitution gives Treaties the power of law.  And he may be wrong.  I’ll leave that to those more knowledgeable than I, but under no circumstances does his action rise to the level of High Crimes and Misdemeanors required for impeachment.

In his effort to dramatize his view, Kucinich has played into the hands of Republicans.  We will hear this echoed all the way to November 2012.  Kucinich should publicly admit his folly and apologize.

Share

The First Teabagger

 Posted by at 8:28 am  Editorial, Holiday, Politics
Feb 212011
 

Presidents Day

Now I can see you asking what the first Teabagger has to do with Presidents Day, but there is a connection.  Presidents Day celebrates George Washington and Abraham Lincoln.  Republicans seldom mention Lincoln anymore.  Although he was the first Republican President, he was the antithesis of the values and beliefs of today’s Republican Party.  On April 14, 1865, Lincoln was murdered by John Wilkes Booth, and by examining his beliefs, I can make a credible case that Booth was the first Teabagger.

The historical reference for this article is Wikipedia.

Booth believed that the Civil War was not over.  That certainly fits the pattern.  Teabaggers today still believe that the civil war is not over.

Booth was effected by an encounter he had in his youth with a Gypsy fortune teller, who told him he would have a have a grand life, die young, and come to a bad end.  Like Booth, there is nothing too insane for Teabaggers to believe.

Booth was pro-confederate.  So are Teabaggers.

Booth was strongly opposed to abolitionists.  This same racism is deeply embedded in Teabagger beliefs.

Booth served as a delegate for the Know Nothing Party.  That certainly describes Teabaggers, but consider that the party was the nativist political movement of it’s day, hated minorities, strongly opposed immigration, and was open only to males of British descent.  Teabagger screeds on “anchor babies” echo this sentiment.

Booth was an avowed Tenther, just as today’s Teabaggers.

Booth blamed the President and the federal government for the nation’s ills and said he “wished the President and the whole damned government would go to hell”.  Teabaggers share this hatred of the President and federal government.

Finally, Booth followed, in advance, the advice of Bachmann, Beck, Limbaugh, Palin and other Republicans whom Teabaggers worship, and used a Second Amendment solution to cure an election he did not like.  What could be more representative of Teabaggers?

There it is.  Irony of ironies.  The first Republican President was assassinated by the first Teabagger.

Share
Feb 202011
 

tea-partier1I still remember how I felt in 1957, when the Soviets launches Sputnik.  That made two things I knew about the Russians.  They were evil, and they had just done something we (the good guys) couldn’t do.  I felt scared.  Life was simple then for a nine year old boy.  I remember feeling comforted when Jack Kennedy promised we would beat the Russians to the moon.  Today I am 62 and I feel scared again because our nation, once again is threatened.  But if science gave us the answer to what we could do about the Soviets, perhaps science can give us the answer to what we can do about the Teabaggers.

20galaxy

Scientists have estimated the first cosmic census of planets in our galaxy and the numbers are astronomical: at least 50 billion planets in the Milky Way.

At least 500 million of those planets are in the not-too-hot, not-too-cold zone where life could exist. The numbers were extrapolated from the early results of NASA’s planet-hunting Kepler telescope.

Kepler science chief William Borucki says scientists took the number of planets they found in the first year of searching a small part of the night sky and then made an estimate on how likely stars are to have planets… [emphasis added]

Inserted from <Salon>

Now with 500 million planets from which to choose, I figure that there must be one suitable for Teabaggers to inhabit.  But finding the right planet could be problematic.  First, it must have no other life forms.  To inflict Teabuggery on a nascent population, even of microbes, would be inhumanly cruel.  Second, it must be a planet where justice is automatic.  For instance, when a Teabagger shoots at something he or she perceives as “librul”, socialist, or Muslim, the bullet must circumnavigate the globe, hitting the Teabagger who fired it in the ass.  Third, in the interest of kindness, it must be a place where Teabaggers can be happy.  That means laws of science (Teabaggers hate “skience”!) must not operate there.  Then they can call up “down”, in “out”, or whatever insaniTEA they can manage.  They can pollute with no risk of climate change.  They can become more free by denying rights.  Even Sarah Palin would make sense there!  Now this may seem like a tall order, but if we can muster the same Yankee ingenuity and strength of purpose we did in the 1960s, we can accomplish this worthy goal.

Share
Jan 262011
 

26sotu

Last night President Barack Obama gave his State of the Union address, followed by Republican responses by Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Michelle Bachmann (R-MN).  Everyone paid respect to Gabrielle Giffords.  Also notable were people who did not attend.  Paul Broun (R-GA) stayed away, but tweeted, “Mr. President, you don’t believe in the Constitution.  You believe in socialism.”  Equaling Broun in ignominious disrespect, the three most anti-constitutional Supreme Court Justices also boycotted the speech: Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.  In this article, I have the complete video of all three speeches, my own in depth analysis of Obama’s speech and comments on the two Republican responses.  Every speech contained at least one major lie.

Here is the Obama speech with text here.

Obama rightly said that Republicans and Democrats will have to move forward together or not at all. At several points throughout the speech he pointed to accomplishments from the last two years, but I prefer to concentrate just on his proposals.

He wants to eliminate subsidies for the oil industry and invest the savings in green energy.  I fully agree.  Boehner almost cried over that one.

He wants to make permanent the $10K tuition tax credit for four years of college.  This idea does not go far enough, because it benefits only those families that pay $2,500 a year or more in taxes.

He wants to take on the immigration issue and alluded to the Dream Act.  I agree, but need more specifics.

He wants build infrastructure, including giving 80% of Americans access to high speed rail and 90% of Americans access to the next generation of high speed wireless.  I fully agree.

He wants to lower corporate tax rates by closing loopholes that favor some companies and industries.  I’m cautious here.  If ALL the loopholes are truly closed, especially those enable companies to evade taxes by keeping profits offshore, I would support it, because the most abusive corporations would actually pay more taxes.

He wants to review all government regulations, but create and enforce safeguards to protect the American people.  I support the former, but only contingent on the latter.

He wants to freeze annual domestic spending for the next five years, without harming our most vulnerable citizens or cutting programs we cannot afford to do without.  It sounds good in principle, but I don’t see how he can do so and build infrastructure too.

He wants medical malpractice reform for frivolous lawsuits.  I’m OK with that as long as only frivolous lawsuits are impacted, and there are no caps on punitive damages.

He wants to strengthen Medicare and Social Security without cutting benefits or privatization.  I’m concerned that he failed to mention retirement age and COLAs.

He wants to eliminate the Bush tax cut for the top 2%.  I agree.  Boehner’s eyes got very big here.  He may have soiled his pants.

He wants to merge, consolidate and reorganize the government to eliminate duplication and overlap.  This is a truly herculean task, but it desperately needs to be done.  There are currently twelve different agencies regulating the oil industry.  There should be one regulating all energy matters.

He promised to veto any bill that contains earmarks.  While not all earmarks are bad, some, especially Republicans abuse them.

He attributed Republican members of Congress for having the same dream for the American people that he does.  This was Obama’s big lie.  The Republican dream for the American people is to eliminate the middle class and establish one party rule.  If they shared a dream for the American people, they would on occasion do something for our benefit.  They have not and do not.  Republicans rule exclusively for the benefit of millionaires, billionaires, and criminal corporations.  For Obama to attribute the same dream to them is anthropomorphizing a snake.

Paul Ryan’s Republican response was a compendium of attacks and lies.

He blamed Obama for Republican debt and attacked Obama’s agenda while offering none of his own.  But since Republicans made him the Budget Czar yesterday in HR-38, the person with complete control over spending levels in the House Budget, his Roadmap for America is a good summary of Republican proposals.

Republicans want to simplify the tax code, raising taxes on people making under $250,000, and lowering them for millionaires, billionaires and corporations.

Republicans want to end Social Security for people under 55.

Republicans want to replace Medicare with discount vouchers for seniors, which they can use to purchase their own private insurance.  Because the risks od insuring the elderly are so high, there is no private insurance.

To his credit, Ryan did say that government must provide a safety net for people who cannot support themselves.  However, I believe he lied.  Consider Jan Brewer’s Republican safety net.

Finally, Michelle Bachmann spoke as only she can.  This author takes no responsibility for damage done to screens and keyboards as a result of watching the video.

Michelle was unable to figure out how to manage two cameras.  Staring off into empty space is the most intelligent thing she said or did, but she does think the founding fathers ended slavery.

Of the three, while Obama’s speech needs to be fleshed out with more specifics, his vision for the future is far superior to the Republican alternatives.

Share
Jan 152011
 

GOP HateI’m not saying that Jared Loughner was a Republican.  I’m not saying that Sarah Palin, Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh or any of the dozens of other Republican politicians and pundits that spread hatred and violence were in his mind at the time of his horrific crimes.  Maybe they were, maybe they weren’t.  If anyone knows, they aren’t talking for fear of creating problems in his criminal prosecution.  Based on most of the professionals I have heard that are speculating on Loughner’s condition think he is schizophrenic or psycho effective (schizophrenia with bipolar disorder).  People like this are especially susceptible to suggestion.  While Loughner was probably not politically motivated, he was a sick fish swimming in a poisoned ocean.  Most fish can withstand the poison, but not the sickest ones.  While it is unquestionably Republican politicians and pundits that poisoned the ocean with their unrelenting promotion of hatred and violence, even they may not be the ones most responsible.  In recent days I have been thinking about the legacy of Republican hatred from the past, and it hit me that hate and violence are usually not a grass roots thing.  They are astro-turfed from the top down.  Poisoning the ocean does not happen without the process being fertilized by lots and lots of money.  That’s what happened in the 1960s.  That’s what is happening today.  I had not started to do the research needed to connect the dots when I found a video at Crooks and Liars with Ed Schultz and Mike Papantonio that do so.  Here is that video:

Considering this, I feel much more strongly the need for true transparency in campaign finance.  We may not be able to cure Republican hate, but we must at least expose who is paying for it.

Share
Jan 092011
 

9crosshairs

Sarah Palin has scrubbed the images from her website and her Facebook page targeting Gabriel Giffords and others with the crosshairs of a gun sight.  As I watched in horror yesterday, and as it became apparent that the shooting of eighteen people, the death of six, including a nine year old girl and a Federal Judge, is a direct effect of the Republican litany of hatred and calls for violence, I wondered if Palin and her republican co-conspirators can wash the blood from their hands.  This time they cannot.  I railed against this in December in Second Amendment Solution Gone Bad.  I had done so before in October in Rand’s Republican Brownshirts Strike.  I predicted it way back in March in Potential High for Right Wing Violence.  This has been coming for a long time.  The Republican Party is responsible from Mitch McConnell and John Boehner down.  No McConnell and Boehner were not behind calls for violence, but they refused to object to those within their own leadership that have.  Lets explore this issue in depth.

This is not the first time that Gabby Giffords was targeted by Republicans.  Here she is in an MSNBC interview.

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

Even though, as a Blue Dog who agrees with Republicans on the issues as often as not,  that did not protect her.  Republican ideologues demand lock-step purity.

Keith Olbermann interviewed Mark Potok of the SPLC, profiling the shooter.

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

The Pima County Sheriff made it as clear as he could, without giving away details needed for prosecution that Arizona’s climate of right wing hatred is a factor.

9dupnikWhile not stating a motive for the shootings, Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik in Tucson used a nationally televised press conference to condemn the tone of political discourse in his state. He charged that public debate is now "vitriolic rhetoric," which has rendered Arizona "the mecca for prejudice and bigotry."

Dupnik suggested that such rhetoric can have deadly consequences.

"We need to do some soul searching," Dupnik told reporters. "It’s the vitriolic rhetoric that we hear day in and day out from people in the radio business and some people in the TV business.

"When you look at unbalanced people, how they respond to the vitriol that comes out of certain mouths about tearing down the government, the anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this county is getting to be outrageous. Unfortunately, Arizona, I think, has become sort of the capital," Dupnik continued.

"We have become the mecca for prejudice and bigotry," Dupnik said… [emphasis added]

Inserted from <CNN>

Talking about tearing down the government, bigotry and prejudice, he was clearly not talking about Democrats.  His references to media people seemed pointed at Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and their ilk.  The person most responsible for that climate in Arizona is the RepubliCare Death Angel, Jan Brewer.  One of the things that shocked me most, as I watched the coverage was Brewer’s speech.  She said the right things, but it seemed that she could not keep the occasional twinkle from her eyes and smirking grin from her lips.  She appeared to be pleased at what had happened.  Here’s one frame from that speech that shows what I mean.

9deathangel

Of course the problem goes way beyond Arizona.  There is a love affair between guns, extreme rhetoric and the Republican Party.  Do you remember when Republicans celebrated the Oklahoma City bombing with an ‘open carry’ event outside Washington, publicized on Fox and praised by several Republican House Representatives?  I found two quotes on from Broun and Pratt, the organizers, on Alternet.

9opencarry

Broun:

Broun, a Republican, sees civil war looming on the horizon. "Fellow patriots, we have a lot of domestic enemies of the Constitution, and they’re right down the Mall, in the Congress of the United States — and right down Independence Avenue in the White House that belongs to us," Broun told the crowd. "It’s not about my ability to hunt, which I love to do. It’s not about the ability for me to protect my family and property against criminals, which we have the right to do. But it’s all about us protecting ourselves from a tyrannical government of the United States." [emphasis added]

Pratt:

"I look around: it’s so good to see all these terrorists out here," Pratt said. "Janet Napolitano, she figured, as governor of Arizona, that we didn’t have a border problem, but she knows who the real enemy is. Ha, ha, ha, ha. And Bill Clinton’s been runnin’ cover for her, too. Watch out how you guys speak out there, you know, words can have consequences. Remember Oklahoma City? Yeah, I do. And I also remember the Waco barbecue that your attorney general gave us. Thanks a lot…We’re in a war. The other side knows they’re at war, because they started it. They’re comin’ for our freedom, for our money, for our kids, for our property. They’re comin’ for everything because they’re a bunch of socialists." [emphasis added]

Is it any wonder that crazed minds respond with insane acts?

As much as I’d like to say that calls for violence are limited to Republican politicians, pundits and wing-nuts, it is not.  Sadly such calls have come right on this site, and recently.

    • RealityBites says:
      January 7, 2011 at 7:36 am  
      Time to start shooting repugs on sight. They aren’t human nor American. Mankind doesn’t want them either.
      Parasites should always be stepped on.
      Reply
      • TomCat says:
        January 7, 2011 at 7:54 am  
        I’m sorry, but your call for violence is no less offensive than when Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin do it. When you adopt Republican tactics, you put yourself down to their level.
        Reply
        • Marx says:
          January 7, 2011 at 10:17 am  
          TomCat I agree with you wanting to keep it classy but RealityBites really has a point. The sad fact is, its just time. Enough is enough. AZ is murdering people, PG&E blew up a whole neighborhood and then charged the people extra for their destruction, Monsanto is destroying the earth, corporate bailouts out of citizens’ pockets etc. etc. ad nauseum. We need to make them fear us and not the other way around. Personally I have too much to live for and will probably just go to Europe, but for people who really want to stand their ground and protect the true US ideology, well you’ve got some dirty work to do and it starts with eliminating those infected fuckholes.
          Reply
          • TomCat says:
            January 8, 2011 at 8:01 am  
            Marx, classy has nothing to do with it. For years I have been railing against Republicans for encouraging their base to commit violent acts against Blacks, Latinos, Gays, Abortionists, Muslims, etc. I have done so because what they are doing is criminally wrong. Wing-nuts from their base have listened and people have died. What kind of hypocrite would I be, if I were to condone calls for violence against Republicans? I’m not saying they don’t deserve it. They do. But if we adopt the kind of tactics they use, we will become no better than they are.
            Reply

The difference is how we respond to them.  I wrote my second reply just a few minutes before the shooting occurred.  Little did I know how timely this would be, and I take pride in the way I handled this.  By comparison, top Republican leadership ducks with the excuse that it’s not their place to interfere with the free speech of their associates, including Sarah Palin, Rand Paul, Michelle Bachmann, Sharon Angle, Adam West, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, Glen Beck and many more.  The blood of these victims is on their hands.

Although I use strong rhetoric, it a condemnation of violence, never a call for it.  But even I am not completely immune.  A few days ago, I quipped that Blue Dogs should be given jobs circumcising conscious gorillas.  We all need to condemn violence as part of political rhetoric, the subject of Keith Olbermann’s Special Comment.

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

Finally, please keep the victims of this tragedy and their families in your thoughts and prayers.

Share
Jan 032011
 

3helping_handOne of history’s most memorable quotes comes from President John F. Kennedy: “Ask not what your country can do for you.  Ask what you can do for your country.”  Across our nation, opportunities for service abound.  Our infrastructure is crumbling.  Our educational system struggles to stay ahead of the third world.  More Americans lack health care than ever before.  Homelessness has skyrocketed, and the list goes on.  At a time of record unemployment, a significant portion of our national workforce can be mobilized to meet those needs.  Therefore I propose a program of Universal Service to America.  Here’s an overview of how it would work.

Upon turning 18 years of age, every American capable of service would be conscripted for service, and paid a reasonable stipend for that service, for a minimum of two years.  High school students would be deferred until they graduate.  Upon conscription, each American could choose either military service or civilian service, with military paid a bit more.  Older people could also volunteer. Civilian service workers would be tasked to meet America’s needs according to their individual skill sets, many in a WPA type setting.  People could reenlist when their service terms end.

The only deferments would be for disability and for education.  Service time would increase for those completing a two year AA degree to three years, for those completing a four year BA or BS degree to four years, for those completing a masters degree to six years and for those completing a doctorate to eight years.  Provided that they complete their service, the entire cost of their education will be paid.

On the civilian side, our .infrastructure would be rebuilt, we could end illiteracy in America.  We could have scientists and engineers working on green energy, we could put highly skilled teachers in locations where union teachers prefer not to serve.  We could put doctors and nurse practitioners in rural and inner city clinics.  The list is endless.  At the same time, taking so many workers from the job market would increase the demand for workers.

On the military side, the benefits are enormous. An American contract worker doing laundry in Iraq earns about $100,000, and the contractor charges taxpayers more than twice that.  A private earning under $20,000 could be doing that laundry, and saving taxpayers close to $200,000 in the process.  Multiply this by hundreds of thousands of contract workers doing jobs soldiers could be doing and this alone could finance the civilian side of the program.

This is just a bare bones outline.  As long as Republicans control the House, nothing that keeps the likes of Halliburton and KBR from ripping off American taxpayers has a chance to pass, so there is ample time to flesh this out.   What do you think?  What do you suggest?

Share

2010: Merry Christmas

 Posted by at 8:53 am  Editorial, Holiday
Dec 252010
 

Christmas

Christmas is an interesting holiday as most spend it attending to matters that have nothing to do with it’s origin or intent.  Even the secular traditions have largely fallen prey to jingle bells on cash registers and Christmas cheer that’s 86 proof or more.  Sadly, those with the most joy this year are Republicans and the millionaires and billionaires they represent.  But I’d like to step back from all that and remind us all that this is the day that we celebrate the birth of Jesus, not Supply-side Jesus, but the real one.

Now in those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus, that a census be taken of all the inhabited earth.  This was the first census taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria.  And everyone was on his way to register for the census, each to his own city.  Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and family of David,  in order to register along with Mary, who was engaged to him, and was with child.  While they were there, the days were completed for her to give birth.  And she gave birth to her firstborn son; and she wrapped Him in cloths, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn.  In the same region there were some shepherds staying out in the fields and keeping watch over their flock by night.  And an angel of the Lord suddenly stood before them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them; and they were terribly frightened.  But the angel said to them, "Do not be afraid; for behold, I bring you good news of great joy which will be for all the people; for today in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord.  "This will be a sign for you: you will find a baby wrapped in cloths and lying in a manger."  And suddenly there appeared with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying,

    "Glory to God in the highest,

         And on earth peace among men with whom He is pleased."

[Luke 1:1-14, NASB]

This, in my opinion is not history. Quirinus was governor of Syria at the wrong time and there was no census during his governorship.  But that’s not important to me.  Most of our traditions are mistaken or unrelated, as well.  Shepherds would have pastured their flocks outside Bethlehem in the spring, not in mid winter.  December 25 was originally adopted in the Roman Empire because it was Mithras’ (the ‘divine’ man-god of a popular religion) birthday.  It was probably kept due to its close proximity to Saturnalia and the solstice.  Our Christmas tree, wreaths, yule logs and mistletoe (my personal favorite) are all pagan traditions we have adopted.  But that’s not important to me either.

What is important to me is that around 2000 years ago, a man named Jesus was born.  According to my faith, he was divine.  If you don’t agree, that’s OK.  If you believe something else, that’s OK.  If you believe in nothing, that’s OK too.  Believing in nothing requires the strongest faith of all.

I’d like you to consider a few things about Jesus’ life that make him special.  First he was a revolutionary. He taught that love trumps power.  He taught that wealth is a hindrance, not a blessing, and had far more concern for the poor than for the rich.  He honored the people in his society who were the most despised: lepers, tax collectors, and prostitutes for example.  He never called for war.  He never condemned people for shortcomings in their lives.    He tolerated all except the intolerant, the religious hypocrites, the Pharisees and Sadducees, the Republican Theocons of his day.  He condemned them for meddling in people’s daily lives, trying to control people with piety codes, and pretending to he righteous, when they were just as flawed as anyone else.

My point is this.  No matter what you believe about Jesus’ divinity, his example is worthy for us to emulate, especially his overriding concern for the poor and his opposition to those who use religion to dominate others.

Finally, Christmas is just another day.  If we are not practicing peace on earth and good will towards men all year long, isn’t it rather foolish to celebrate it for just a day?

Share