You would think that with the spotlight on the President of the United States nearly every day, he would be largely the focus of the concentration of power in this country. While that is what we are led to believe, it is what we learned as far back as High School that is playing out in the modern day political landscape. Each branch of government is extremely powerful and can drive not only an agenda, but political will throughout the country.
Since the early days of the Obama administration, it had become clear that the Republicans in the House of Representatives and the Senate would do anything they could to obstruct an economic recovery effort by the new President. This so that any achievements in returning the country to prosperity could not be credited to a democratic president. What did they need to do achieve their objective? Nothing. What "nothing" means is that every proposal and every idea proposed by the President and the democratically controlled House and Senate to help drive the country out of the ditch was summarily opposed by the minority party in the two houses.
Were the ideas proposed by the administration and supported by the legislative branch's democratic majority radical or unusual? You would have thought so if you had listened to the republican minority but in reality the proposals made were no different than any other president or legislature in modern times had proposed, democrat or republican. The cost to turn around our economic problems may have been a bit higher due to the more dire nature and depth of the downturn but nothing radical was proposed. Yet the opposition screamed that these solutions represented a socialistic trend set by our president.
In one of the most glaring examples of a double standard and contradiction, John Boehner who was the Minority Leader in the last two years of the Bush administration cheered on the bailout as it was being presented and proposed by his party's chief executive. Just months later as this program was being rolled out and administered by the new President Obama, he railed against the identical proposal.
In another astounding example of hypocrisy Mitch McConnell, the Minority Leader in the Senate just stated that now that a war or military action was being proposed by a Democratic Commander In Chief, he and his party felt that they were free to oppose it. This from a party that gave the Bush administration a blank check to fight two wars.
But the conservative ideology and its effect on us is not just limited to a minority legislative branch. The Supreme Court has also weighed in on a couple of very important decisions in the past year. The first involves what the court deemed as "free speech." For nearly 100 years a law had been in place saying that corporations needed to limit the amount of money they contributed to political campaigns. This so that individuals, actual people, could compete with the deep pockets of our country's largest corporations. Over the years there was very little opposition to this rule of law and the results were considered equitable. But in a case brought before the Supreme Court, the court overturned this law. It said that essentially that money was speech. That if corporations were unable to use their money to promote their political point of view, that this was a restriction of freedom of speech. Therefore the limits placed on corporations to fund political campaigns was considered unconstitutional. Constitutional scholars were surprised and caught off guard by the decision wondering how corporate entities could be considered people. But John Boehner, now Majority Leader called it a great day for free speech.
The Supreme Court also struck down a class action lawsuit by women who were passed over for promotion saying that the suits were too broad and required them to file lawsuits individually. The judgement effectively said that these women cannot band together to file a class action because the details of their discrimination are all different. This while Walmart, the defendant, uses their size and scope to squeeze vendors across the globe for the lowest wholesale prices. Now since filing a lawsuit is so costly many who have been potentially discriminated against will never have the chance to have their stories told in a court of law.
This is not to say that the president and the Executive Branch has had the chance to affect change. While he ran a campaign of change back in 2008, many do not believe that the change has gone far enough. While campaigning and governing are two different matters the President has gotten through several pieces of important legislation since he replaced George W. Bush. They would include a stimulus package that has resulted in a slow but steady economic recovery. Some say that a stronger package, blocked by republicans, would have meant a greater and more rapid recovery. He passed landmark health care legislation, that despite the outrage by some, had been called for in some form by every president since Richard Nixon. He also ended the policy of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" in the military. While some said it did not go far enough, it was a big step forward for civil rights for gays who serve our country.
These are just a few examples of legislative victories by the Obama administration. But one glaring example fell short because of minority opposition. Obama pledged to end tax breaks for anyone making over $250,000 a year in salary. Because of republican opposition and a possible government shutdown, republicans in the House of Representatives who were in the minority and in a position to block a new budget wielded their power and retained tax breaks for the most wealthy in this country. Since the Republicans in House have become the majority as of this past January, nothing has gotten through of any consequence. Most recently a jobs bill was shot down by the republican majority and will not be passed this session further stunting the economic recovery.
So if you think that the country has gone left in the past three years since Barak Obama has become President, you would be wrong. If you think that the President is soley to blame for a lackluster economic recovery, you would also be wrong. Now more than ever, the minority has a louder voice than every. The legislative branch and the judicial branch continue to erode the rights of the little guy. If that were not enough, you can point to the states where an assault on organized labor is taking place by republican governors in both Wisconsin and Ohio. Just be tuned in and ask yourself if you want these guys to run country again in two years?
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Happy Birthday Ronald Reagan
The Ronald Reagan Legacy at 100
Why is Ronald Reagan so important after leaving office nearly 22 years ago? The short answer is that his actions and legacy are barely relevant nearly a generation later. But due to a few vocal pundits who figure the masses will believe whatever is said, he seems to have become the patron saint of the modern conservative movement. Never mind that today he may be considered a moderate if not a liberal . It is time to set the record straight on former President Ronald Reagan. While much is written about Reagan’s presidency, it is time to sort through the facts on his presidency and judge him for what really took place during that time.
What was the real legacy that Ronald Regan left behind during the time he occupied the White House and what, if any lasting effect did it have on today’s economy, society, and political climate?
Ronald Reagan beat Jim Carter in the 1980 general election after Jimmy Carter served a single term in office. He succeeded Gerald R. Ford who himself took over for Richard Nixon and was the only unelected president in US history. With the 1970’s being one of the most politically tumultuous periods since World War II the country’s morale and economy was still reeling from Watergate. While Carter had moved forward the mid east peace process, he was unable to stimulate a lack-luster economy. During the national election in 1979 – 1980, Carter faced the Iranian hostage crisis and a botched rescue attempt. He retreated into the White House and Reagan won the election easily.
Americans were eager for a clean sheet of paper putting Watergate, a stagnate economy and the 1970’s behind them.
Reagan put together a conservative dream team many of whom were from his home state of California. They included James Baker, Edwin Meese and Michael Deaver. While in office he also brought in heavy weights Casper Weinberger as Secretary of Defense and George Schultz as Secretary of State both with extensive business and conservative think tank experience. Some of these individuals held different positions during the two terms Reagan spent in office. Baker, Deaver and Meese spent the first four years as Regan’s closest advisors in the White House.*
In a precursor to his two terms in office, and just months into his presidency President Reagan addressed a serious labor dispute between the US Government and the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Association founded in 1968 by F. Lee Bailey. In August 1981 after a work stoppage, Reagan declared their strike a violation of law even though other government agencies had struck for higher wages in the past. He required them to return to their positions within 48 hours or be fired. Just 10% of the 13,000 responded to the president’s order and returned to work. As a result Reagan made good on his threat and the rest were fired. Reagan had successfully broken the union. While claiming that it would take just two years to re-staff the control towers and FAA flight control centers, it took nearly 10 years to restore the experience that former controllers held. Previous controllers were able to re apply for their positions but not before 1986, five years after they were let go from their prior positions. The great irony in all this was that during the election, less than a year earlier, PATCO refused to endorse Jimmy Carter because of their ongoing labor dispute and his unwillingness to respond to their work demands. As a result, they threw their support behind Reagan, who at the time showed support for the controllers. The Teamsters and other labor organizations also broke ranks with the Democratic Party and Carter who they viewed as unfriendly to labor. One year later over 11,000 air traffic controllers were out of a job and the flying public was without experienced personnel controlling US airspace.
Another mess that Reagan ultimately claimed full responsibility for but said he had no knowledge of was the Iran Contra scandal. Simply put this affair had the US selling arms to Iran illegally and taking some of the proceeds from the sale to illegally fund Contra (anti communist) rebels in Nicaragua. Both actions were forbidden by US law. It was just nine years before that that Iranian “students” held US Embassy personnel in the embassy with the endorsement of the Iranian Revolutionary government. At the time of the scandal and to this day, we have no formal relations with Iran. Direct funding of the Nicaraguan rebels was also made illegal by several legislative bills know as the Boland Amendment during the early 1980’s. But that did not seem to matter to Reagan’s people. Colonel Oliver North, a member of the National Security Council, operated a clandestine operation from the basement of the White House to sell arms to Iran and fund a secret guerilla war in Central America. 14 would be charged with crimes associated with Iran Contra including North and 11 would be convicted. But no one would implicate the president. Casper Weinberger, Reagan’s friend and Secretary of Defense was also implicated and convicted. North’s conviction was overturned on appeal by a technicality. All were later pardoned by then president George H.W. Bush who served as Vice President under Ronald Reagan. Similar to Watergate, this enormous breach of US law was swept under the rug as a result of some of its instigators being within the highest levels of the government.
Unless you were an air traffic controller or somehow involved with Iran or the Contras neither of these two events changed your lives. But while showing ruthlessness for organized labor and a total disregard for US law should not be taken lightly, it does begin to paint a picture of the Reagan policies where ideology does not seem to get in the way of the rule of law.
What was to come next was the vaunted Tax Reform Act of 1986. Sold to Americans as a tax neutral piece of legislation supported by both parties, it was one of two tax bills passed during the Reagan administration. While driving down the tax rate of the highest income wage earners, one of the corner -stones of the legislation was the phasing out of the deduction of consumer debt. This was a tax increase on the poor and working class. So if you were to have the means to pay by cash, you would not be hurt by this legislation. But for those who carried a balance on their credit cards or purchased vehicles by borrowing, those loans were no longer deductable. So while the rich had their tax rates lowered, the working poor and middle class had their taxes increased. Conservative talk show pundits and some historians point to this legislation as a landmark in lowering the taxes of Americans. They say that the result of this legislation was economic stimulation that proves that tax cuts are the answer to stimulating the economy and increased tax revenue. They say that as the Result of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 revenue grew shortly after the Act was implemented. While that may be true, it was done by collecting billions of dollars from the poor and middle classes who were no longer able to write off consumer debt and was in fact a tax increase. Even with the additional tax revenue, the Reagan administration left the American people in 1989 with record deficits.
The Tax Reform Act was just part of Reagan’s overall thoughts regarding the economy. He and his economic advisors, led in part by Budget Director David Stockman were big believers in “Supply Side Economics” which was really a cover for the term “trickle-down economics.” Stockman himself later renounced supply side economics. Trickle-down economics was the theory that if you primed the pump, appropriating money at the top of the economic spectrum, it would trickle down to those at the middle class. Therefore many of the tax breaks Reagan believed in were directed toward the top wage earners. Along with the democratically controlled congress, Reagan signed legislation that moved the highest tax bracket from 70% to 28% (the democrats had it both ways too). During the primary elections in 1980 Reagan touted his theory of supply side economics. His opponent and later Vice President George H.W. Bush called this “voodoo economics.” The result being that to this day, the wealthy pay a lower, disproportionate amount of taxes compared to that of the middle class. During the 1980’s the top income gains went to 1 to 2 percent of the wealthiest in the population.
As a result of the Reagan era tax strategy and out of control spending much of it on military spending, the US had the slowest economic growth decade since the end of World War II. But that was not all. National debt as a percentage of the overall economy, doubled under his presidency. The damage would not cleared up for a decade, and done so under democrat president Bill Clinton.
America changed dramatically under Ronald Reagan; but not necessarily for the better. Some want to deify him. It is certainly true that a lot has been named after him. A large government office building in Washington D.C. that was conceived during his time in office (and was completed late and over budget) was named after him. Shortly after leaving office the airport in Washington D.C. was named after Reagan. Since he was the Commander and Chief he has had an aircraft carrier named after him. But that is not all. Others want his picture on US currency. In California, someone is trying to rename a 4,000 ft. peak after him crowning it Mt. Reagan. Of course he has his library and one of two jets used as Air Force One while he was president as a featured attraction.
So what is the real Reagan legacy? The term “plausible deniability” was coined from the Iran Contra scandal. It meant that if subordinates operated a clandestine mission and did not tell the boss about it, the chief executive could claim that he had no knowledge of the operation itself. This, knowing all along that it furthered policy supported by the chief executive himself. It was also an era where public relations coined terms that were the opposite of was really being done. The Tax Reform Act of 1986 was really a tax hike on the poor and middle classes. But before anyone really realized what was happening they were all too happy to have their taxes cut. Too bad it just was not for most of them. “The Patriot Act” was a similar term coined by George W. Bush. It allowed sweeping reforms on our claims to privacy and walked right up to the line in terms of protections guaranteed us by the Constitution of this country. All of us wanted to be considered patriots. Little did we know it was little more than a give-back of our personal freedoms. The terminology of re-badging bad as good was not originated by Reagan, but he added to it use and helped perfect this phraseology which is all too commonplace today.
So while there was a great military build-up during Reagan, there was also a great consolidation of military facilities. Much of the consolidation decisions were made for political reasons leaving intact bases and installations that resided in conservative districts. This consolidation economically devastated many communities across the country. To this day these cities and towns are struggling to recover from Reagan era base closures. While we bankrupted the Soviet Union ending Soviet communism which culminated during the Reagan era, we nearly bankrupted ourselves in the process. But if you were a defense contractor, the 1980’s where the good old days. Parts and tools such as screws, wrenches and even toilet seats were being billed to the government at rates hundreds if not thousands of times their cost with nearly no oversight from military procurement officials. While the few benefited greatly from Reagan’s economic policies and military build up, many more were left with less.
Throughout history there have been haves and have not’s. But the United States had always been the land where someone could make it with hard work and determination. The playing field had largely been leveled and a relative peace had been reached between labor and management. Each had carved out a comfort zone for themselves in the decades following World War II. It was not until Reagan became president and supply side economics had given one side an advantage over another had this tentative detente between labor and management been broken. Setting conservatives up against liberals and playing their ideologies against each other became a Reagan trademark that has reached new heights today. That may be the great legacy left by President Ronald Reagan.
*James Baker went on to spend the second term as Secretary of the Treasury. Michael Deaver left public service to start his own lobbying firm and was known to have the ear of the first lady. Edwin Meese became Attorney General.
Friday, January 7, 2011
Same Old Crazy People
Let's welcome the 112th Congress. Did you think anything new was really going to happen? How many times can we be disappointed? There was even an attempt at some bipartisan cooperation during the lame duck session back in '010. But I guess bipartisan only meant that rich people were going to continue to receive the tax breaks brought about by King George the Bush.
There was tough talk throughout the campaign season by the Republicans. We are going to show those liberals how it's done. No more earmarks. $100 billion in budget savings. They were going to clean up Washington. Everyone was going to have "adult conversations." So that led everyone to believe that they were going to act like adults, right?
Not so fast.
John Boener was sworn in earlier this week as the new Speaker of the House. The outgoing Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, gave him an over sized gavel to over compensate for what may not be an undersized appendage, but rather a non-existent agenda or a plan for continuing to turn around the economy and cutting the budget. The larger and louder the noise from the gavel, the more effective you are? One can believe I guess.
In case you cannot remember Boener's list of hits from the 111th Congress where he served as Minority Leader, here are a few of brilliant thoughts and ideas:
* First said that he did not want a health care bill. Then said that Republicans wanted to be part of the process. Then when they were included in the process said that they should start over.
* When the Supreme Court overturned a 100 year old law limiting the amount of money corporations could spend political campaigns (knowing that corporations had deep pockets), Boener said that "...it was a great day for free speech."
* Said that he did not believe in having to compromise.
So is it really a surprise despite the tough campaign talk that he and his Republican colleagues have no plan for the next two years other than to oppose the President. When you have no plan or agenda, what is the first thing you do? Read the Constitution of the United States in the gallery of the Congress of the United States. Cost to the taxpayer: $1.4 million. That is a nice way to start things off. Shouldn't our representatives already have a working knowledge of The Constitution. As someone so appropriately put it, isn't this like reading the alphabet to students each fall when they come back to school? Congress will now require any bill that is introduced must first quote the Constitutional provision that allows it to proceed.
In showing that he can wield a pretty gnarly knife, Boener made a bold statement by cutting the Congressional budget by a mere 5% saying that it was a symbolic gesture. This gesture was thought to affect the now generous flow of office supplies to congressional offices. A few less paper clips will be available to congressional staffers. Those of us who use office products feel for the staffers who will have to use staples instead.
Also this week, promising to make government more "transparent," the Republican Congress decided to make the details of their health plan secret. Could they quote the provision in the Constitution that allows them to do that?
Speaking of Health Care, rather than doing something productive, one of the first orders of business next week will be to introduce a bill that repeals President Obama's health care initiative. It has not chance of even making it out of the Senate. But this is what is important to Republicans. Good thing they have health care.
What else do they have in store for us? Remember that $100 billion they promised they were going to cut? Well in an epic case of doublespeak, they are furious at even the hint of them not being able to achieve that savings. But they admit now that they will be lucky to find $70 billion. By the time all that is said and done that number will also seem ambitious. Especially after they take all the earmarks that they promised not to take but have already started taking.
Even the conservative media is getting into the mix. Now that the election is over their primary job is to distract. They are getting everyone thinking about stupid things that are just not true. Bill O'Reilly this week said that the tides are proof of God's existence. They move in and out and do not skip a beat. Bill needs to attend grade school again. It is called the earth's gravitational pull, Bill. O'Reilly claims to once have been a teacher. Ever wonder where all the uneducated come from?
So here is the real issue. Where is that outrage that got these guys elected? These geniuses have not even been in office a week and they are backtracking on every pledge except the pledge to continue to say "no." And no just means do nothing. If you support or vote for these clowns, where is your voice? You will probably sit on the sidelines and complain about someone who is just trying to do something to make things better. Then when election time comes around again, the right wing media will get you all frothed up so that you vote the same idiots back in.
The do nothing marry go round continues.
There was tough talk throughout the campaign season by the Republicans. We are going to show those liberals how it's done. No more earmarks. $100 billion in budget savings. They were going to clean up Washington. Everyone was going to have "adult conversations." So that led everyone to believe that they were going to act like adults, right?
Not so fast.
John Boener was sworn in earlier this week as the new Speaker of the House. The outgoing Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, gave him an over sized gavel to over compensate for what may not be an undersized appendage, but rather a non-existent agenda or a plan for continuing to turn around the economy and cutting the budget. The larger and louder the noise from the gavel, the more effective you are? One can believe I guess.
In case you cannot remember Boener's list of hits from the 111th Congress where he served as Minority Leader, here are a few of brilliant thoughts and ideas:
* First said that he did not want a health care bill. Then said that Republicans wanted to be part of the process. Then when they were included in the process said that they should start over.
* When the Supreme Court overturned a 100 year old law limiting the amount of money corporations could spend political campaigns (knowing that corporations had deep pockets), Boener said that "...it was a great day for free speech."
* Said that he did not believe in having to compromise.
So is it really a surprise despite the tough campaign talk that he and his Republican colleagues have no plan for the next two years other than to oppose the President. When you have no plan or agenda, what is the first thing you do? Read the Constitution of the United States in the gallery of the Congress of the United States. Cost to the taxpayer: $1.4 million. That is a nice way to start things off. Shouldn't our representatives already have a working knowledge of The Constitution. As someone so appropriately put it, isn't this like reading the alphabet to students each fall when they come back to school? Congress will now require any bill that is introduced must first quote the Constitutional provision that allows it to proceed.
In showing that he can wield a pretty gnarly knife, Boener made a bold statement by cutting the Congressional budget by a mere 5% saying that it was a symbolic gesture. This gesture was thought to affect the now generous flow of office supplies to congressional offices. A few less paper clips will be available to congressional staffers. Those of us who use office products feel for the staffers who will have to use staples instead.
Also this week, promising to make government more "transparent," the Republican Congress decided to make the details of their health plan secret. Could they quote the provision in the Constitution that allows them to do that?
Speaking of Health Care, rather than doing something productive, one of the first orders of business next week will be to introduce a bill that repeals President Obama's health care initiative. It has not chance of even making it out of the Senate. But this is what is important to Republicans. Good thing they have health care.
What else do they have in store for us? Remember that $100 billion they promised they were going to cut? Well in an epic case of doublespeak, they are furious at even the hint of them not being able to achieve that savings. But they admit now that they will be lucky to find $70 billion. By the time all that is said and done that number will also seem ambitious. Especially after they take all the earmarks that they promised not to take but have already started taking.
Even the conservative media is getting into the mix. Now that the election is over their primary job is to distract. They are getting everyone thinking about stupid things that are just not true. Bill O'Reilly this week said that the tides are proof of God's existence. They move in and out and do not skip a beat. Bill needs to attend grade school again. It is called the earth's gravitational pull, Bill. O'Reilly claims to once have been a teacher. Ever wonder where all the uneducated come from?
So here is the real issue. Where is that outrage that got these guys elected? These geniuses have not even been in office a week and they are backtracking on every pledge except the pledge to continue to say "no." And no just means do nothing. If you support or vote for these clowns, where is your voice? You will probably sit on the sidelines and complain about someone who is just trying to do something to make things better. Then when election time comes around again, the right wing media will get you all frothed up so that you vote the same idiots back in.
The do nothing marry go round continues.
Monday, November 15, 2010
Meet the New Boss...Same as the Old Boss
P.T. Barnum once said that you can fool some of the people all the time, all of the people some of the time, but you can never fool all of the people all of the time. The last part of the quote by Barnum is becoming less and less true. It does appear that you can fool most of the people most of the time. Look no farther than the most recent election for proof.
The GOP, Tea Party and the conservative press rallied the American voter to the cry of government should be smaller and spend less. It was a simple message that many could not argue with. We were and continue to spend more money than we take in as a government. The budget has only been balanced in one administration in the past 40 years. The rally cry has become so strong that the right is going to take a shot at repealing the Heath Care Bill, legislation that every President back to Nixon has publicly shown support for.
But running for office is one thing, being in office is another. It is the same old story. Two items have come up in the past two weeks since the election: Will you stop asking for earmarks, known as "pork" and subsidies to farmers and big oil, for example who receive billions in support for sometimes not growing a crop? The answer to that question has been remarkably muted. It would seem that those who have been among the most vocal and powerful in saying that spending is out of control are now backing away from pledges of spending less when it comes to representing their own districts or states even if it means continuing to spend. The premise in the first place is ridiculous. A representative's job is to bring back money and jobs to their district or state. THAT is one of the primary functions when sent by us to Washington.
But when you say that you are going to Washington to clean up the corruption and stop the out of control spending and then still want the same old money for your district, nothing has changed. That is nothing more the pure hypocrisy. The loudest squawkers were once again the Republications. For the past two years they have sat with their hands crossed refusing to help bail out the economy. They railed against the stimulus and even pledged very publicly not to participate in it. But when it came to actually getting the money, they lined up quietly and took it like everyone else. They went back to their districts and states and stood in front of the golden shovels as the ground was being broken, posed for the photos that appeared in the local paper and took credit for all the great new projects happening locally. Then they went back to Washington and criticized the administration for spending too much money. This is speaking out of both sides of your mouth at its best.
But now that the Republicans are no longer the minority party in the House of Representatives and have added to the seat count in the Senate their actions are going to be more visible.
So let's start with Mitch McConnell (R) Kentucky. He recently said that his biggest priority was to get Obama out of the White House in two years. You would think that he would be a big opponent of earmarks and higher spending. Well, if you have ever seen him on a Sunday morning political talk show, you know that he is a master of dodging questions and issues. McConnell has requested 158 separate earmarks during the past two years totaling just over $957 billion. He recently said that stopping these earmarks would not save any money but reluctantly said that he will heed the wishes of the GOP and Tea Party and support a ban on these very same earmarks.
13 Democrats on the House Farm Committee lost their jobs earlier this month. Among the new crop of new congresspeople, Vicki Hartzler of Missouri supported by the Tea Party. The Hartzlers own a farm equipment business and a farm and received $750,000 in over the past 15 years. She beat Ike Skelton Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. Speaking out of both sides of her mouth, she said that she is committed to reduce government spending but added that farming is a matter of national security. Food needs to be grown in the US. If you take that tact isn't pretty much everything a matter of national security? Health care, Jobs, manufacturing. After all isn't "Life, Liberty and the Persuit of Happiness" in our Bill of Rights?
Next up further proof you can really fool some of the people in Minnesota all of the time. Michelle Bachmann. She herself is a critic of farm subsidies but her family has received as much as $50,000 in farm subsidies. She listed the subsidies on her personal income statement as part of the Bachmann family farm. He father in law has received as much as $250,000 in farm subsidies although Bachmann herself has not been involved. Good for Michelle. She recently stated that she is for extending the Bush tax cuts for the most wealthy but would oppose an extension on jobless benefits. Let them eat cake, right Michelle?
The last two, freshmen representatives somehow got away with unseating their opponents railing against government spending while themselves being on the government dole. Newly elected representative Kristi Noem (R) South Dakota has taken $3 million over the past 15 years although gave up her share in the ranch that received the subsidies just last year. Finally the last newly minted representative, gospel singer Stephen Fincher of Tennessee. His family has taken $3.2 million in the past ten years.
Isn't it great that when poor folks get a handout it is called welfare. But when farmers or oil companies get a handout it is a subsidy. Where are these free market Republicans when money is getting passed out to big business? The reality is that if they contribute to you at election time, you better contribute to them!
The good news is that a new five year Farm Bill is up for debate in 2012. This bill known for subsidizing farmers and guaranteeing them a price and in some cases paying them for NOT growing crops will be contentious. Call on Bachmann, Noem, Hazler and Fincher will be the first to say that we should end subsidies for farmers and all who are committed to a free market economy. If you are concerned about socialism or communism this is where you might just want to begin.
But the you've got to be kidding me award actually goes to the private sector. The Ricketts family owns the Chicago Cubs. Daddy Joe was founder of TD Ameritrade. So all that stock market money you made and lost last decade allowed Joe and son Tom to purchase the Chicago Cubs. Tom runs the Cubs as Chairman. Tom wants $300 million in taxpayer money in the form of bonds to renovate Wrigley Field. Now this would be only mildly irritating if the story stopped there. But dad Joe took part of your money lost in the stock market and now his money in the form of commissions and profits and put it to good use: he has been an outspoken critic of taxpayer earmarks. In a matter of fact he put his money where his mouth is and founded Taxpayers Against Earmarks. The sole purpose of this foundation is to educate americans about wasteful spending in government. Perhaps he should start with a stern lecture to his son.
Who is to blame for allowing this hypocrisy to continue? The press. It is their job to ask tough questions and get answers that are direct. It is all too often that the questions are just dodged or not asked at all.
Remember, we are entitled to the best government we deserve.
The GOP, Tea Party and the conservative press rallied the American voter to the cry of government should be smaller and spend less. It was a simple message that many could not argue with. We were and continue to spend more money than we take in as a government. The budget has only been balanced in one administration in the past 40 years. The rally cry has become so strong that the right is going to take a shot at repealing the Heath Care Bill, legislation that every President back to Nixon has publicly shown support for.
But running for office is one thing, being in office is another. It is the same old story. Two items have come up in the past two weeks since the election: Will you stop asking for earmarks, known as "pork" and subsidies to farmers and big oil, for example who receive billions in support for sometimes not growing a crop? The answer to that question has been remarkably muted. It would seem that those who have been among the most vocal and powerful in saying that spending is out of control are now backing away from pledges of spending less when it comes to representing their own districts or states even if it means continuing to spend. The premise in the first place is ridiculous. A representative's job is to bring back money and jobs to their district or state. THAT is one of the primary functions when sent by us to Washington.
But when you say that you are going to Washington to clean up the corruption and stop the out of control spending and then still want the same old money for your district, nothing has changed. That is nothing more the pure hypocrisy. The loudest squawkers were once again the Republications. For the past two years they have sat with their hands crossed refusing to help bail out the economy. They railed against the stimulus and even pledged very publicly not to participate in it. But when it came to actually getting the money, they lined up quietly and took it like everyone else. They went back to their districts and states and stood in front of the golden shovels as the ground was being broken, posed for the photos that appeared in the local paper and took credit for all the great new projects happening locally. Then they went back to Washington and criticized the administration for spending too much money. This is speaking out of both sides of your mouth at its best.
But now that the Republicans are no longer the minority party in the House of Representatives and have added to the seat count in the Senate their actions are going to be more visible.
So let's start with Mitch McConnell (R) Kentucky. He recently said that his biggest priority was to get Obama out of the White House in two years. You would think that he would be a big opponent of earmarks and higher spending. Well, if you have ever seen him on a Sunday morning political talk show, you know that he is a master of dodging questions and issues. McConnell has requested 158 separate earmarks during the past two years totaling just over $957 billion. He recently said that stopping these earmarks would not save any money but reluctantly said that he will heed the wishes of the GOP and Tea Party and support a ban on these very same earmarks.
13 Democrats on the House Farm Committee lost their jobs earlier this month. Among the new crop of new congresspeople, Vicki Hartzler of Missouri supported by the Tea Party. The Hartzlers own a farm equipment business and a farm and received $750,000 in over the past 15 years. She beat Ike Skelton Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. Speaking out of both sides of her mouth, she said that she is committed to reduce government spending but added that farming is a matter of national security. Food needs to be grown in the US. If you take that tact isn't pretty much everything a matter of national security? Health care, Jobs, manufacturing. After all isn't "Life, Liberty and the Persuit of Happiness" in our Bill of Rights?
Next up further proof you can really fool some of the people in Minnesota all of the time. Michelle Bachmann. She herself is a critic of farm subsidies but her family has received as much as $50,000 in farm subsidies. She listed the subsidies on her personal income statement as part of the Bachmann family farm. He father in law has received as much as $250,000 in farm subsidies although Bachmann herself has not been involved. Good for Michelle. She recently stated that she is for extending the Bush tax cuts for the most wealthy but would oppose an extension on jobless benefits. Let them eat cake, right Michelle?
The last two, freshmen representatives somehow got away with unseating their opponents railing against government spending while themselves being on the government dole. Newly elected representative Kristi Noem (R) South Dakota has taken $3 million over the past 15 years although gave up her share in the ranch that received the subsidies just last year. Finally the last newly minted representative, gospel singer Stephen Fincher of Tennessee. His family has taken $3.2 million in the past ten years.
Isn't it great that when poor folks get a handout it is called welfare. But when farmers or oil companies get a handout it is a subsidy. Where are these free market Republicans when money is getting passed out to big business? The reality is that if they contribute to you at election time, you better contribute to them!
The good news is that a new five year Farm Bill is up for debate in 2012. This bill known for subsidizing farmers and guaranteeing them a price and in some cases paying them for NOT growing crops will be contentious. Call on Bachmann, Noem, Hazler and Fincher will be the first to say that we should end subsidies for farmers and all who are committed to a free market economy. If you are concerned about socialism or communism this is where you might just want to begin.
But the you've got to be kidding me award actually goes to the private sector. The Ricketts family owns the Chicago Cubs. Daddy Joe was founder of TD Ameritrade. So all that stock market money you made and lost last decade allowed Joe and son Tom to purchase the Chicago Cubs. Tom runs the Cubs as Chairman. Tom wants $300 million in taxpayer money in the form of bonds to renovate Wrigley Field. Now this would be only mildly irritating if the story stopped there. But dad Joe took part of your money lost in the stock market and now his money in the form of commissions and profits and put it to good use: he has been an outspoken critic of taxpayer earmarks. In a matter of fact he put his money where his mouth is and founded Taxpayers Against Earmarks. The sole purpose of this foundation is to educate americans about wasteful spending in government. Perhaps he should start with a stern lecture to his son.
Who is to blame for allowing this hypocrisy to continue? The press. It is their job to ask tough questions and get answers that are direct. It is all too often that the questions are just dodged or not asked at all.
Remember, we are entitled to the best government we deserve.
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Congratulations Republicans
It is the day after. It is a different type of hangover. What happened last night? There is no way to positively spin it. The democrats, with the exception of California, took a beating last night. What happened and why, this blogger will leave to the pros to spin in either direction.
But what is worth looking into is where we have been and where we are going between now and the next big election in 2012 which is just two short years from now.
Two years ago: The stock market was at lows not seen in decades. Americans' 401K and IRA values melted like ice in a tavern urinal on St. Patrick's Day. Stocks like General Electric were at historic lows. The American banking system was about three days away from collapse making the dollar worthless (think about THAT!). General Motors, an employer of half a million people was bleeding cash and would file bankruptcy. Chrysler was in danger of shutting its doors forever and shedding nearly sixty-thousand jobs. Between these two iconic automobile companies and Ford, nearly two-thousand dealerships across America were closed because cars were not selling. American jobs were being lost at a monthly rate unseen since the Great Depression. We were also fighting a war in Iraq that was costing billions and many felt was unwarranted. Most importantly there was no plan to turn any of this around.
Today: As this is written the stock market is over 11,000 and the Fortune 500 have record amounts of cash on hand. Bailed out banks and insurance companies are paying back the money lent to them by the government and our financial system has been stabilized. Once the money is all paid back, it will be done so at a PROFIT to the American taxpayer. General Motors most recently reported a profit and Chrysler is now part of one of the largest car companies on the planet, Fiat, and continues to produce vehicles and employ workers. While few would argue that job creation and unemployment is where is needs to be, this country is no longer bleeding jobs and jobs are being created. As for the war in Iraq, we are no longer involved in day-to-day combat operations in that country. All this and we now have a health care program in place that for starters makes health care available to 30-million people who would not be able to afford it. Insurers can no longer cancel or disallow the insured for existing conditions and children up to the age of 26 can now remain on their parents' policies.
IF YOU THINK THIS IS SPIN, GOOGLE EACH OF THESE ITEMS. Now I ask when had so much been done for so many in such a short time? It was accomplished with the refusal of the Republicans to participate in any meaningful way.
You really have to hand it to the Republicans though. How can these accomplishments in the past two years by a Democratic Executive and Legislative branch be woven into a negative story, sold by the Republican who were largely responsible for the economic meltdown in the first place, and roll to a landslide victory last night? I will leave that to each of you. But I have a pretty good idea about what will happen over the next two years.
I am reminded of the 1972 movie, The Candidate starring Robert Redford. At the end of the movie, Redford playing lawyer turned just elected candidate Bill McKay standing in a closet and asks "What do we do now?"
A friend of mine, a conservative told me how happy they were that the Republicans were going to win in this election cycle. But they added, "they better come up with a plan because I have not heard any plan from the Republicans." This pretty much sums up the blind devotion and blind faith that so many conservatives, independents and the misguided so-called tea partiers had during this election. If we do not make progress in the next two years, blame gridlock. Because that it was was voted for last night. There was no plan by the Republicans during the past two years (and extending back to the Bush administration) and there is no plan now.
So what will happen in the next two years? Well a friend of mine put it best: "The Republicans are great at winning, and bad at governing." So see them continue to campaign for the presidency in the next two years. They will continue to be the party of "no." But now that they control the lower house of Congress, they will not allow any legislation to pass that has any meaningful consequence. As the election cycle kicks in for 2012 they will blame the Obama administration for doing nothing and the continued suffering of the American people. Whether they can sell that in 2012 remains to be seen.
If history is any indication though, Democrats may have a glimmer of hope. A very similar political scenario played out in the mid-1990's. Bill Clinton was trying to clean up the Reagan/Bush 1 mess of the 1980's. It was no easy task either. He also lost Congress in 1994. By the turn of the century we were seeing unprecedented growth from a Democratic Executive branch and a Republican Legislative branch so there is some hope in a positive future. But times have changed. Back then the American people's well being seemed to be the common denominator between the two parties.
With a have/have-not mentality today of the conservative movement, that commonality may be gone.
From the middle what can we do? Demand an agenda from the Republicans. Ask your elected officials Democrat or Republican what they are going to do. How are they proposing to make America a better place in this irreversible global economy? Hold them accountable. If you are going to reduce government spending, where are you going to reduce it from? Ask them if they plan to reduce taxes, how are we going to pay off the debt that they are so adamantly against?
Ask tough questions and get direct answers. If nothing else we deserve that.
But what is worth looking into is where we have been and where we are going between now and the next big election in 2012 which is just two short years from now.
Two years ago: The stock market was at lows not seen in decades. Americans' 401K and IRA values melted like ice in a tavern urinal on St. Patrick's Day. Stocks like General Electric were at historic lows. The American banking system was about three days away from collapse making the dollar worthless (think about THAT!). General Motors, an employer of half a million people was bleeding cash and would file bankruptcy. Chrysler was in danger of shutting its doors forever and shedding nearly sixty-thousand jobs. Between these two iconic automobile companies and Ford, nearly two-thousand dealerships across America were closed because cars were not selling. American jobs were being lost at a monthly rate unseen since the Great Depression. We were also fighting a war in Iraq that was costing billions and many felt was unwarranted. Most importantly there was no plan to turn any of this around.
Today: As this is written the stock market is over 11,000 and the Fortune 500 have record amounts of cash on hand. Bailed out banks and insurance companies are paying back the money lent to them by the government and our financial system has been stabilized. Once the money is all paid back, it will be done so at a PROFIT to the American taxpayer. General Motors most recently reported a profit and Chrysler is now part of one of the largest car companies on the planet, Fiat, and continues to produce vehicles and employ workers. While few would argue that job creation and unemployment is where is needs to be, this country is no longer bleeding jobs and jobs are being created. As for the war in Iraq, we are no longer involved in day-to-day combat operations in that country. All this and we now have a health care program in place that for starters makes health care available to 30-million people who would not be able to afford it. Insurers can no longer cancel or disallow the insured for existing conditions and children up to the age of 26 can now remain on their parents' policies.
IF YOU THINK THIS IS SPIN, GOOGLE EACH OF THESE ITEMS. Now I ask when had so much been done for so many in such a short time? It was accomplished with the refusal of the Republicans to participate in any meaningful way.
You really have to hand it to the Republicans though. How can these accomplishments in the past two years by a Democratic Executive and Legislative branch be woven into a negative story, sold by the Republican who were largely responsible for the economic meltdown in the first place, and roll to a landslide victory last night? I will leave that to each of you. But I have a pretty good idea about what will happen over the next two years.
I am reminded of the 1972 movie, The Candidate starring Robert Redford. At the end of the movie, Redford playing lawyer turned just elected candidate Bill McKay standing in a closet and asks "What do we do now?"
A friend of mine, a conservative told me how happy they were that the Republicans were going to win in this election cycle. But they added, "they better come up with a plan because I have not heard any plan from the Republicans." This pretty much sums up the blind devotion and blind faith that so many conservatives, independents and the misguided so-called tea partiers had during this election. If we do not make progress in the next two years, blame gridlock. Because that it was was voted for last night. There was no plan by the Republicans during the past two years (and extending back to the Bush administration) and there is no plan now.
So what will happen in the next two years? Well a friend of mine put it best: "The Republicans are great at winning, and bad at governing." So see them continue to campaign for the presidency in the next two years. They will continue to be the party of "no." But now that they control the lower house of Congress, they will not allow any legislation to pass that has any meaningful consequence. As the election cycle kicks in for 2012 they will blame the Obama administration for doing nothing and the continued suffering of the American people. Whether they can sell that in 2012 remains to be seen.
If history is any indication though, Democrats may have a glimmer of hope. A very similar political scenario played out in the mid-1990's. Bill Clinton was trying to clean up the Reagan/Bush 1 mess of the 1980's. It was no easy task either. He also lost Congress in 1994. By the turn of the century we were seeing unprecedented growth from a Democratic Executive branch and a Republican Legislative branch so there is some hope in a positive future. But times have changed. Back then the American people's well being seemed to be the common denominator between the two parties.
With a have/have-not mentality today of the conservative movement, that commonality may be gone.
From the middle what can we do? Demand an agenda from the Republicans. Ask your elected officials Democrat or Republican what they are going to do. How are they proposing to make America a better place in this irreversible global economy? Hold them accountable. If you are going to reduce government spending, where are you going to reduce it from? Ask them if they plan to reduce taxes, how are we going to pay off the debt that they are so adamantly against?
Ask tough questions and get direct answers. If nothing else we deserve that.
Friday, October 29, 2010
Where Were These Idiots Five Years Ago?
As election 2010 is just days away it is unbelievable how the country continues to be polarized. It amazes me how right the right wing has become. If there was a "wing tip," that is where some of these geniuses would be standing.
I had the good fortune to run into one of these wing nuts last night. He started by saying that one of the politicians running was a loser and would always be a loser. In my neighborhood he probably thought I would just join the chorus. He seemed surprised when I took issue with his characterization. "We should run the government like a business."
Then he just started spewing the conservative line. "Taxes are unconstitutional." I just shook my head and asked him if he liked roads?
"Roads are OK I guess."
What about infrastructure? He thought about that for a second and was not convinced that this was mandated in the Constitution. Neither were schools.
I asked him about the poor. "F**k the poor" was his answer. And schools are not mentioned in the Constitution either. The poor are living right at the level that they want to be."
Everything Republican was good and everything Democrat was bad. He hated everything Obama has done in the past two years but would not acknowledge what a poor job his predecessor had done. I asked him to name one achievement between 2001 and 2008. Nothing. Then came the line that I hear from most of my Republican friends these days. "I did not like Bush either." No accountability. When was the last time a Republican president balanced the budget? Richard Nixon.
But what is worse is how these new Constitutionalists think that all of a sudden that we can turn the clock back to 1776 and that if it is not written in the Constitution then we should not be concerned with it. Someone should have told that to George W. Bush when he invaded Iraq in 2002 without reason or provocation. Maybe these same idiots would have you believe that no laws should be made or created other than those that exist in the Ten Commandments.
We live in a modern society. It is 2010. No one has ever seriously questioned that public education should not exist. It has been the greatest single common denominator in America's rise to economic prominence in the past 100 years. This is the difference between what exists in the third world and what exists here. I have never met anyone who said that they love to pay taxes. But I have also never met anyone who complains about modern plumbing and their poop disappearing when they flush the toilet. Taxes pay for that. We take that for granted. But in other countries modern plumbing is a luxury. Is that the lowered bar we are aspiring to because we are that adamantly opposed to giving up a little so that we can live in a sophisticated society? That is not socialism, that just common sense and the way our country has been set up.
If we were done once the Constitution was written, why was there a Bill of Rights? Why are there amendments to those Bill of Rights? Why was a Legislative branch established in the Constitution if it were not to make new laws as the times warranted. Why was a Judicial branch established to interpret those laws if there were not a reason to warrant interpretation. The reason we are even asking these questions and have to address them is that people in prominent positions and many who run for public office these days do not seem to have a basic understanding, high school level, of our governmental process.
75% of our national budget is taken up with two items: Social Security and the military. So if you think that you are paying too much in taxes, you should probably start there. Privatize Social Security? Be happy that this did not happen in 2005 as G.W. Bush wished (and recently said was his biggest regret). The military. Well, maybe we could start by not invading countries that we have no real issue with. Or maybe if we are to be the rest of the world's protector ask those that need protecting to foot at least part of the bill. That would be a nice start for those who think that the country should run more like a business. Remember G.W. said that Iraq would be paid for with oil money? What ever happened to that? The remaining 25% is not much to speak of. It is running our government and keeping our infrastructure from crumbling.
No one likes to pay taxes, but come on...get real.
I had the good fortune to run into one of these wing nuts last night. He started by saying that one of the politicians running was a loser and would always be a loser. In my neighborhood he probably thought I would just join the chorus. He seemed surprised when I took issue with his characterization. "We should run the government like a business."
Then he just started spewing the conservative line. "Taxes are unconstitutional." I just shook my head and asked him if he liked roads?
"Roads are OK I guess."
What about infrastructure? He thought about that for a second and was not convinced that this was mandated in the Constitution. Neither were schools.
I asked him about the poor. "F**k the poor" was his answer. And schools are not mentioned in the Constitution either. The poor are living right at the level that they want to be."
Everything Republican was good and everything Democrat was bad. He hated everything Obama has done in the past two years but would not acknowledge what a poor job his predecessor had done. I asked him to name one achievement between 2001 and 2008. Nothing. Then came the line that I hear from most of my Republican friends these days. "I did not like Bush either." No accountability. When was the last time a Republican president balanced the budget? Richard Nixon.
But what is worse is how these new Constitutionalists think that all of a sudden that we can turn the clock back to 1776 and that if it is not written in the Constitution then we should not be concerned with it. Someone should have told that to George W. Bush when he invaded Iraq in 2002 without reason or provocation. Maybe these same idiots would have you believe that no laws should be made or created other than those that exist in the Ten Commandments.
We live in a modern society. It is 2010. No one has ever seriously questioned that public education should not exist. It has been the greatest single common denominator in America's rise to economic prominence in the past 100 years. This is the difference between what exists in the third world and what exists here. I have never met anyone who said that they love to pay taxes. But I have also never met anyone who complains about modern plumbing and their poop disappearing when they flush the toilet. Taxes pay for that. We take that for granted. But in other countries modern plumbing is a luxury. Is that the lowered bar we are aspiring to because we are that adamantly opposed to giving up a little so that we can live in a sophisticated society? That is not socialism, that just common sense and the way our country has been set up.
If we were done once the Constitution was written, why was there a Bill of Rights? Why are there amendments to those Bill of Rights? Why was a Legislative branch established in the Constitution if it were not to make new laws as the times warranted. Why was a Judicial branch established to interpret those laws if there were not a reason to warrant interpretation. The reason we are even asking these questions and have to address them is that people in prominent positions and many who run for public office these days do not seem to have a basic understanding, high school level, of our governmental process.
75% of our national budget is taken up with two items: Social Security and the military. So if you think that you are paying too much in taxes, you should probably start there. Privatize Social Security? Be happy that this did not happen in 2005 as G.W. Bush wished (and recently said was his biggest regret). The military. Well, maybe we could start by not invading countries that we have no real issue with. Or maybe if we are to be the rest of the world's protector ask those that need protecting to foot at least part of the bill. That would be a nice start for those who think that the country should run more like a business. Remember G.W. said that Iraq would be paid for with oil money? What ever happened to that? The remaining 25% is not much to speak of. It is running our government and keeping our infrastructure from crumbling.
No one likes to pay taxes, but come on...get real.
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Run Sarah Run
Has there ever been a better candidate to represent the Republicans in 2012 than Sarah Palin? A week ago she was welcomed by the Tea Party movement as their key note speaker. It became very apparent that she should be the nominee for the Republican Party in 2012.
From all of us with a brain used to reason with, there would be no better candidate to go up against than Sarah Palin. She has an impeccable resume starting out as the Mayor of Wasilla, Alaska with a population of 5469 in 2000 when the last census was taken. She was then thrust into the Governor’s mansion where she did not complete her full first term (just over 2 ½ years) before resigning. During her time in office she was chosen by then presidential candidate Senator John McCain in what now seems like a last act of desperation in trying to win the presidency. While not done completely single handedly she was a major contributor in helping him self-destruct. While spending a whole 90 days on the campaign trail she not only stole the spotlight from McCain, there were rumors that she was more concerned with her wardrobe than she for was preparing interviews with the national media who wanted to understand her where she stood on the issues in perhaps the most important election of our time. When asked by CBS’s Katie Couric as question as simple as can you tell me about some of the books and magazines you read she responded by saying that she would get back to her on that.
Jimmy Carter had his brother capitalizing on his brother political success by producing beer and occasionally getting himself into trouble in his home state. Ronald Reagan had his daughter and his son who questioned his ideology publically while in office. While Barak Obama seems to have a pretty quiet family, his adversary, Sarah Palin, is dogging him like a long lost illegitimate half sister.
What is just beyond comprehension is Sarah Palin’s view of reality. The first being that she is a relevant politician. She has held one major office, the Governorship of Alaska, and could not even complete that. She is nothing more than a pretty face, winning a former Miss Alaska pageant. Congratulations. She was a sportscaster in her home state reading off of a TelePrompTer yet she criticizes her half brother, Obama, for doing the same. Every President in the modern age has used a TelePrompTer to give speeches. Yet to her this must be some type of new invention because at every turn she seems to think that this device is some type of chief executive novelty. This was made even more evident during her time on the podium when rather than using a TelePrompTer; Palin used her hand as a speech making aid while speaking and during the question and answer session.
But while the issues of the Tea Party participants are very real, the horse they have hitched their wagon to is lame. Political celebrity Palin is clueless on the issues and full of glittering generalities offering no new ideas to help the most unfortunate who have been left behind by the Republican leadership during the past nine years. Yet, if you think Palin is really one of those who you can identify with as “one of us Tea Partiers,” she took $100,000 of your money to speak at your convention in an attempt to further her own ambitions. After resigning her position as governor in Alaska, few details emerged as to why. But one detail slipped though her PR machine: Sarah Palin was going to pen a book on her illustrious political career and 90 day run as a Vice Presidential candidate. That book and subsequent speaking engagements would make her an instant multi millionaire.
So you say that Sarah Palin is a smart, patriotic savvy politician and business woman. Do not tell that to Ms. Palin. She seems to have something against a good education; especially a higher education. Yet Palin herself attended four institutions of higher learning including private, public and junior colleges before getting a B.S. from the University of Idaho in 1987. While many in this country would aspire to attend a college but are prevented by in doing so by academic requirements or funding, Palin seems to think that people running this country should not be well educated. She seems to take swipes at our current president every chance she gets for completing a Harvard education and being a former professor at an institution of higher learning. Perhaps she forgets that the previous president, one from her own party was educated at another pretty good school, Yale. She also forgets that our current president worked in some of the poorest neighborhoods in Chicago helping those who were the most desperate of the desperate.
Could you imagine President Palin going up again Vladimir Putin, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, or Hugo Chavez to name just a few of the crazies we deal with on a daily and weekly basis? Maybe just once we would match crazy with crazy; But maybe not. It would not be long before we would be speaking Farsi, Russian and Spanish. Palin to date has little or no foreign policy experience. McCain aids said that during debate preparation in 2008, Palin was completely uninterested and had little feel or interest for foreign policy subject matter. She had no idea of why we were in Afghanistan. She explained to her debate preparation team that she did not realize that Iraq and Sadam Hussein were not responsible for the holocaust on 911. While she does understand that Russia is not too far away from Alaska, her first speaking engagement after resigning as governor was to a group in Japan so that she could appear to become more internationally focused. Of course that speech was not open to the press.
While being coy about running for president in 2012 she is beefing up her conservative credentials by joining, “Fair and Balanced” Fox News as a contributor. In a fair and balanced analysis she called for Obama’s Chief of Staff to resign for calling Congress “retards” while excusing her patron saint Rush Limbaugh for using the same term to describe personnel in the White House. She called Limbaugh’s tirade “satire.” Sarah, it looks like you found a running mate. Yet when comedian David Letterman told a joke about her daughter in what clearly was satire she spent days in public forums demanding an apology from him. Rather than let the circus continue, Letterman finally apologized. Congratulations and good luck in 2012.
Has there ever been a better candidate to represent the Republicans in 2012 than Sarah Palin? A week ago she was welcomed by the Tea Party movement as their key note speaker. It became very apparent that she should be the nominee for the Republican Party in 2012.
From all of us with a brain used to reason with, there would be no better candidate to go up against than Sarah Palin. She has an impeccable resume starting out as the Mayor of Wasilla, Alaska with a population of 5469 in 2000 when the last census was taken. She was then thrust into the Governor’s mansion where she did not complete her full first term (just over 2 ½ years) before resigning. During her time in office she was chosen by then presidential candidate Senator John McCain in what now seems like a last act of desperation in trying to win the presidency. While not done completely single handedly she was a major contributor in helping him self-destruct. While spending a whole 90 days on the campaign trail she not only stole the spotlight from McCain, there were rumors that she was more concerned with her wardrobe than she for was preparing interviews with the national media who wanted to understand her where she stood on the issues in perhaps the most important election of our time. When asked by CBS’s Katie Couric as question as simple as can you tell me about some of the books and magazines you read she responded by saying that she would get back to her on that.
Jimmy Carter had his brother capitalizing on his brother political success by producing beer and occasionally getting himself into trouble in his home state. Ronald Reagan had his daughter and his son who questioned his ideology publically while in office. While Barak Obama seems to have a pretty quiet family, his adversary, Sarah Palin, is dogging him like a long lost illegitimate half sister.
What is just beyond comprehension is Sarah Palin’s view of reality. The first being that she is a relevant politician. She has held one major office, the Governorship of Alaska, and could not even complete that. She is nothing more than a pretty face, winning a former Miss Alaska pageant. Congratulations. She was a sportscaster in her home state reading off of a TelePrompTer yet she criticizes her half brother, Obama, for doing the same. Every President in the modern age has used a TelePrompTer to give speeches. Yet to her this must be some type of new invention because at every turn she seems to think that this device is some type of chief executive novelty. This was made even more evident during her time on the podium when rather than using a TelePrompTer; Palin used her hand as a speech making aid while speaking and during the question and answer session.
But while the issues of the Tea Party participants are very real, the horse they have hitched their wagon to is lame. Political celebrity Palin is clueless on the issues and full of glittering generalities offering no new ideas to help the most unfortunate who have been left behind by the Republican leadership during the past nine years. Yet, if you think Palin is really one of those who you can identify with as “one of us Tea Partiers,” she took $100,000 of your money to speak at your convention in an attempt to further her own ambitions. After resigning her position as governor in Alaska, few details emerged as to why. But one detail slipped though her PR machine: Sarah Palin was going to pen a book on her illustrious political career and 90 day run as a Vice Presidential candidate. That book and subsequent speaking engagements would make her an instant multi millionaire.
So you say that Sarah Palin is a smart, patriotic savvy politician and business woman. Do not tell that to Ms. Palin. She seems to have something against a good education; especially a higher education. Yet Palin herself attended four institutions of higher learning including private, public and junior colleges before getting a B.S. from the University of Idaho in 1987. While many in this country would aspire to attend a college but are prevented by in doing so by academic requirements or funding, Palin seems to think that people running this country should not be well educated. She seems to take swipes at our current president every chance she gets for completing a Harvard education and being a former professor at an institution of higher learning. Perhaps she forgets that the previous president, one from her own party was educated at another pretty good school, Yale. She also forgets that our current president worked in some of the poorest neighborhoods in Chicago helping those who were the most desperate of the desperate.
Could you imagine President Palin going up again Vladimir Putin, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, or Hugo Chavez to name just a few of the crazies we deal with on a daily and weekly basis? Maybe just once we would match crazy with crazy; But maybe not. It would not be long before we would be speaking Farsi, Russian and Spanish. Palin to date has little or no foreign policy experience. McCain aids said that during debate preparation in 2008, Palin was completely uninterested and had little feel or interest for foreign policy subject matter. She had no idea of why we were in Afghanistan. She explained to her debate preparation team that she did not realize that Iraq and Sadam Hussein were not responsible for the holocaust on 911. While she does understand that Russia is not too far away from Alaska, her first speaking engagement after resigning as governor was to a group in Japan so that she could appear to become more internationally focused. Of course that speech was not open to the press.
While being coy about running for president in 2012 she is beefing up her conservative credentials by joining, “Fair and Balanced” Fox News as a contributor. In a fair and balanced analysis she called for Obama’s Chief of Staff to resign for calling Congress “retards” while excusing her patron saint Rush Limbaugh for using the same term to describe personnel in the White House. She called Limbaugh’s tirade “satire.” Sarah, it looks like you found a running mate. Yet when comedian David Letterman told a joke about her daughter in what clearly was satire she spent days in public forums demanding an apology from him. Rather than let the circus continue, Letterman finally apologized. Congratulations and good luck in 2012.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)