28. March 2012 by admin.

With the US Supreme Court poised to decide on the insurance mandate of “Obamacare,” there are a few things to keep in mind.

First, the idea of the mandate that Teapublicans now oppose was originated by…you guessed it…Teapublicans!

Second, the federal government already mandates that our citizens and businesses purchase insurance…even health insurance.  You are currently mandated to pay for Social Security insurance and Medicare, and employers are mandated to pay for unemployment insurance.

What’s different about the federal government mandating that we pay for health insurance?

If the Court rules that the insurance mandate is unconstitutional, will we then see lawsuits claiming that the other mandates are unconstitutional as well?  Will we no longer have Social Security, Medicare, and unemployment insurance?  Teapublicans have already tried to dismantle these safety nets.

And what will happen to our health care system?  Since Congress has previously passed legislation mandating hospitals to provide emergency medical treatment to anyone, regardless of their ability to pay, those costs will continue to be passed along to the insured through higher fees.  Given the fact that more than 60 million Americans will be left uninsured, health care costs will continue to rise at a rate more than 10 times that of inflation.

Moreover, the rising cost of health care will continue to push multi-national corporations to send jobs overseas.  The number of uninsured will continue to increase, unemployment will remain high, and quality health care will eventually become affordable only to the wealthy.

It’s no exaggeration to state that this decision is the most important in the Court’s history.  The political implications will be even greater than the conservative majority voting to give the 2000 election to George W. Bush and voting to permit corporations to buy our elections.

Posted in Current Events, President Obama, Supreme Court, Teapublicans, George W. Bush, Corporations, Constitution, Health care, Medicare, Social Security, Government, Politics, Economy | Print | No Comments »

12. March 2012 by admin.

We all know that Teapublicans have their knickers in a knot over the insurance mandates in President Obama’s Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Not only are individuals mandated to carry insurance. Organizations are mandated to offer insurance that covers many types of preventative care, including (OMG!) contraception!

Teapublicans claim that such mandates are unconstitutional and must be repealed immediately. They claim that mandates are evidence of the “socialist, out-of-control big government of the Obama administration.”

But what about the Teapublican-ordered mandates that have been forced upon us?

Teapublicans have been pushing mandates on the American citizenry for many years. Indeed, the idea for health insurance mandates began with the very conservative Heritage Foundation. The idea was promoted by Richard Nixon and Bob Dole, and it was first implemented by Teapublican presidential frontrunner, Mitt Romney.

In a number of states, Teapublicans have mandated ultrasound exams for pregnant women considering an aborton. In most states, Teapublicans have mandated that voters present a photo ID with a current address. Most states have mandated that businesses, bars, even churches post signs if they choose not to allow guns in their establishments. In Florida, Teapublicans have mandated that those down on their luck pay for drug tests before receiving public assistance. In Arizona, Teapublicans are pushing a mandate that the unemployed pay for drug tests before they can receive benefits from their unemployment insurance. And, in many states, Teapublicans have mandated that funds intended for public schools be used for private and parochial schools.

And that’s just scratching the surface. We could also include such Teapublican mandates that marriage be only between and man and a woman, that the sale of the Plan B contraceptive be banned because they consider it tatamount to abortion, etc. And, of course, we can’t forget all those Teapublican–sponsored mandates that either failed to become law or were tossed out by the courts, such as mandatory prayer in schools, religious symbols in government buildings and mandates that the US be officially recognized as a “Christian” nation.

It seems that, for Teapublicans, a policy is only a mandate if you disagree with it.

Posted in President Obama, Religion, Teapublicans, Constitution, Culture, Government, Politics, Health care | Print | No Comments »

9. March 2012 by admin.

For most of US history, the goal of civilized people was to reduce our reliance on guns to settle arguments. In many towns, guns were banned within city limits. In others, people were asked to check their guns with the marshall when they came to town. As a result, even in the so-called “Wild West,” there were fewer shootings than now.

Beginning in 1980, everything changed. That was the year the National Rifle Association first became involved in politics, backing NRA-member Ronald Reagan over Jimmy Carter for president. Since then, the NRA and its 4.3 million members have arguably become the most effective lobbying group in the US.

The group writes legislation with the clear intent of eliminating all gun laws. In 2004, it successfully fought renewal of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban and it has fought to eliminate gun restrictions ever since. 49 states now have NRA-backed “shall carry” laws that eliminate restrictions on concealed weapons. And in states like Arizona, a new round of NRA-created bills is wending its way through the wing nut-dominated legislature. There’s a bill to allow guns on college campuses, a bill to permit “hunters” to use silencers, and a bill to eliminate limits on the size of magazines.

High-capacity magazines? Silencers? Since animals don’t shoot back, what are the NRA members planning on hunting?

Based on Wayne’s Comment on the NRA website, it would seem that the organization’s most high-priority prey is President Barack Obama.

“We’ve been fighting for our Second Amendment rights since 1871, but never has there been a more critical time for our firearm freedoms. The danger is real, the stakes are immense, and the task won’t be easy. Together, however, I know NRA members will go “All In” this election season to deny Obama the opportunity to nominate any more anti-gun judges to the nation’s high court.” – Wayne LaPierre

The real question is where will all this nonsense end? There is no credible threat that anyone is planning on taking away our guns. In fact, gun ownership has expanded every year. Not surprisingly, so has gun violence. But the Second Amendment is not in jeopardy. So what does the NRA really want aside from silencers and high-capacity magazines? Fully automatic assault rifles for hunters? Sniper weapons? RPGs? Tanks? Where does it end? And if there is an end, will anyone survive?

Those are fair questions.

Posted in President Obama, Constitution, Guns, Arizona, Politics | Print | No Comments »

28. February 2012 by admin.

For several years, Teapublicans, especially white pre-Baby Boomers, have fondly remembered the days of their childhood when life was simple. When they could gas up the ’57 Chevy for $3.00 and cruise Main St. all night. It was a white-dominated “Father Knows Best” society of tidy neighborhoods with white picket fences.

Now those same Teapublicans seem determined to take us back to that era.

They can’t seem to grasp that those post-war days are really gone. Those days simply can’t, and won’t, be duplicated. Moreover, Teapublicans can’t seem to grasp the cultural dynamics that created the era they so fondly remember. It was an era of union-based manufacturing jobs that paid well enough to allow Mom to stay home with the kids. It was an era of small retailers, instead of big box chains; of neighborhood diners, instead of fast food chains. It was an era when everyone understood the importance of government and of working together – an attitude necessary for the defeat of Hitler and Hirohito. And it was an era when most of the products we used were made in the USA.

What these nostalgia-loving Teapublicans too easily forget are the seamy underpinnings of that era. African-Americans were segregated and denied the vote. Women were left out of business and politics. Young women were disdained and abandoned if they were unlucky enough to get pregnant before marriage. They were not allowed to attend school. Many were sent away to religious schools to be “rehabilitated” and have their babies in seclusion before giving them up for adoption. Many were simply barred from leaving home so the neighbors wouldn’t find out that they had become “fallen” women. If they chose to keep their babies, they received no child care payments. And if they didn’t want to have their babies, their choices consisted of tumbling down stairs, coat hangars, lye or back-alley butchers.

Yet the Santorum and Gingrich led Teapublicans want to revisit those days. Indeed, the policies being pushed by these candidates may well turn the “way back clock” back past the 60s and 50s, past the horrors of World War II, past the Great Depression, and past the Roaring 20s…all the way back to the 1800s, the days of Robber Barons. A time prior to the formation of the middle class. A time when there were no safety nets for those who were down on their luck. A time when rich industrialists ran everything, and when everyone else slaved 7 days a week to scratch out an existence.

Lest you think I exaggerate, consider the following legislative initiatives and proposals: All of the Teapublican candidates are on record as saying they would cut taxes, especially for the rich and for large corporations. They would eliminate capital gains taxes for the wealthy. At the same time, they would raise taxes on the poor. They would repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act making it impossible for tens of millions Americans to afford health insurance. And they would cut or destroy Medicare and Social Security.

They would drastically cut government, eliminating the Departments of Education and Commerce at a time when our economy is just beginning to show signs of recovery. They would eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency allowing large corporations to pollute our water and air at will with no consequences. They would continue or increase oil subsidies under the GOP’s “drill, baby drill” mantra. At the same time, they would eliminate subsidies for sustainable sources of energy.

They would likely start yet another war by attacking Iran, unleashing a torrent of hatred from the entire Muslim world and destablizing the Middle East and most of Asia. They would deny women the right to control their own bodies, even making it more difficult to obtain contraception. And perhaps most alarming of all, they would weaken the Constitutional separation of church and state.

Interestingly, despite the Teapublican candidate’s promises to shrink the federal government and cut the national debt, their fiscal policy proposals would actually increase the national debt according to the non-partisan US Budget Watch, while President Obama’s proposals would begin to shrink the deficit!

Even if you’re not a progressive as I am, a trip backward in the Teapublican time machine has to be an alarming prospect for all but the most right wing religious zealots.

Posted in President Obama, Corporations, Constitution, Current Events, War, Teapublicans, Religion, Energy, Education, Culture, Health care, Medicare, Economy, Social Security, Politics, Taxes, Deficit, Environment | Print | No Comments »

15. February 2012 by admin.

The current uproar over mandates that Catholic-owned businesses offer contraception to insured employees seems, at best, insincere.

Ignoring the fact that Catholic Charities receives $2.9 billion of taxpayer money, and that the Catholic Church and other religious organizations own billions of dollars worth of real estate and collect billions in donations without paying taxes, there’s a simple principle at stake. Regardless of its ownership and non-profit status, a hospital or retirement home is not legally a church. It’s a business and an employer. And in order to operate as a business, it must meet a variety of legal and government requirements. For example, it must pay half of FICA for its employees. It must meet OSHA requirements for a safe work environment. It must pay for unemployment insurance and workers compensation. It can’t discriminate. And if it offers health insurance, it can’t choose which procedures or pharmaceuticals it wants the insurance to provide.

Such requirements were put in place to protect employees and our society at large.

Interestingly, Catholic-owned enterprises have already complied with the contraception mandate in 20 states. The Church did not raise a fuss until the Obama administration issued the mandate. Only then did the Catholic Church claim that the mandate violates the separation of church and state. What next? Will the Church claim moral opposition to paying FICA? To paying for unemployment insurance? Will it decide that all pharmaceuticals and medical procedures interfere with God’s will?

If the Church is sincere about separation of church and state, will it stop its practice of campaigning for political candidates from the pulpit? Will it no longer allow its tax-free facilities to be used for political gatherings? Will it refuse to take a position on any political issues?

Some Catholic leaders and, of course, Fox Noise Channel claim the contraception mandate is further evidence of an attack on Christianity. Of course, what organization would recognize attacks more quickly than the church that inspired the Crusades? Or the church that attacked indiginous people in order to force them to accept Catholicism?  Or the church that slaughtered and tortured millions as part of the Inquisition?  Or the church that created an environment for sexual predators in its ranks to attack children?

Posted in Current Events, Religion, President Obama, Constitution, Government, Politics, Health care | Print | No Comments »

26. January 2012 by admin.

For some time, I’ve wondered if the rancor in today’s politics has some connection to the outcome of the Civil War. Sounds crazy, right? After all, the Civil War ended in 1865. Yet Teapublicans continue to say things that evoke the elitism and racism of antebellum America. We’ve heard them refer to President Obama as a fascist, socialist and communist. We’ve seen the signs showing his picture distorted to resemble the Joker. And we’re heard them call the President a Kenyan-born, anti-Christian Muslim.

Is it coincidence that such anger and disrespect are directed toward the first president of African-American descent? Doubtful.

Of course, I’m not the only writer to note the obvious. For example, Michael Lind wrote, “Today’s Tea Party is less an ideological movement than the latest incarnation of an angry white minority — predominantly Southern, and mainly rural — that has repeatedly attacked American democracy in order to get its way.” And Robert Reich stated, “It’s no mere coincidence that the states responsible for putting the most Tea Party representatives in the House are all former members of the Confederacy. Of the Tea Party caucus, twelve hail from Texas, seven from Florida, five from Louisiana, and five from Georgia, and three each from South Carolina, Tennessee, and border-state Missouri.”

Upon reading these comments, I knew I had to do my own research. Here’s what I found:

The Union consisted of California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia and Wisconsin. Of the 25 Union states, only three - Kansas, Kentucky and Missouri - voted for McCain in 2008! And it’s important to note that all three were divided during the war. (In both Kentucky and Missouri, pro-secession governments declared for the Confederacy, but never gained significant control of their states. And Kansas was notoriously split with many Confederate sympathizers.)

Now let’s look at the Confederacy. Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia all seceded from the United States. In addition, Kentucky, Missouri, and Oklahoma were divided, and portions of New Mexico and Arizona collaborated with the Confederacy. Of the 16 Confederate states, only four – Florida, New Mexico, North Carolina and Virginia - voted for Obama in 2008! And of those four, only New Mexico could be considered a blue state.

To take it a step farther, many of the states which attained statehood following the Civil War were settled by former Confederate soldiers and Confederate sympathizers who were running away from the federal government. These include Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Utah, Oklahoma, and Arizona. All nine voted for McCain in 2008!

Three other latecomers - Colorado, New Mexico, and Washington - already had significant populations prior to the Civil War. Both Colorado and New Mexico had large Hispanic and Native American populations that were indifferent to the war. All three of these states voted for Obama in 2008!

Hawaii and Alaska were not admitted to the Union until the 1950s, so little can be concluded from their votes, especially since President Obama was born in Hawaii and the VP candidate on the opposing ticket was from Alaska.

Despite Teapublican denials, it would seem that the issues of racism and states’ rights are “gifts” that keep on giving.

Posted in Tea Party, Teapublicans, Current Events, President Obama, Culture, Politics | Print | No Comments »

22. January 2012 by admin.

When it was discovered that 2008 presidential candidate, John Edwards, had an affair as his wife was fighting cancer, he became a national pariah who was vilified by virtually everyone.

Most vocal among his critics were the “Christian” conservatives who decried Edward’s lack of “values.”

But those same “Christian” conservatives now support Newt Gingrich.  Yes, that Newt!  The Newt who sanctimoniously led the cheers for Bill Clinton’s impeachment as the result of Clinton’s indescretion with an intern. The Newt who later admitted to an affair while his first wife was battling cancer. The Newt who had yet another affair while his second wife (and former mistress) was critically ill with Mulitple Sclerosis.  And who, despite the advice of his wife’s physician who told him that stress would be damaging to his wife, asked her to agree to an open marriage so he could continue his affair!

These facts, along with the Newt’s admission of 84 ethics violations as Speaker of the House should make anyone question his “values.” Indeed, they should be automatic disqualifiers for higher office. Yet here he is, the new standard bearer for “Christian” conservatives in the Teapublican presidential race.

After all, according to these pretend Christians, the Newt’s transgressions are in the past.  They don’t really reflect the man the Newt has become today.

No, they don’t. Today’s version of Newt Gingrich is even more ethically challenged. He is angrier, more vitriolic, more vengeful and more sanctimonious. But it seems that is what’s so appealing to “Christian” conservatives about the Newtster. He voices their self-righteous anger about President Obama and liberals. And following ABC’s interview with the Newt’s ex-wife about his affairs, they’re even more angry. Not at the Newt, but at ABC and the rest of the “lamestream” media for dredging up such an unsavory story about their hero.

“Sure, Newt is no saint,” they say. “But he has repented.” Apparently, his repentance has been so complete that he even earned the blessing of the apparent keeper of the “Christian” conservative’s moral compass - Sister Sarah Palin. That should be good enough for anyone. Shouldn’t it?

And what of John Edwards?  The “Christian” conservatives still consider him a pariah, of course.

Posted in Religion, Teapublicans, Current Events, President Obama, Culture, Politics | Print | No Comments »

20. January 2012 by admin.

The field of Teapublican “presidential” (and I use the term loosely) candidates have proven, once and for all, that Teapublicans are almost completely devoid of ethics. I’d call them hypocrites, but we’re talking about Teapublicans here, so, for their benefit, I’ll try to use small words.

Teapublicans famously fight for so-called family values, yet many support Newt Gingrich who is twice divorced and whose second wife stated that Newt demanded an “open” marriage. In other words, a marriage that would allow him to boink anyone he wanted. So much for the “sanctity” of marriage issue.

Gingrich also admitted to 84 ethics violations while Speaker of the House and resigned in disgrace. Most of these violations were the result of Newt gaming the system to enrich himself. So much for the anti-Washington, anti-corruption issue.

Turning to the front-runner, Teapublicans are furious with so-called “Obamacare.” But what did President Obama use as a model for his health care reform? Why “Romneycare,” of course. You simply can’t be against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and support Mitt Romney. So much for the government health care issue.

Romney is also a “Vulture Capitalist” (Newt’s words, not mine) who led a private equity firm that purchased undervalued corporations with other peoples’ money, saddled the corporations with large management fees then sold off their assests while laying off thousands of American workers. So much for the jobs issue.

In addition, Romney has admitted to “parking” large amounts of money in off-shore bank accounts to avoid paying taxes. And though he has not yet released his tax returns, he estimates that his tax rate is “somewhere in the area of 15 percent.” Given that Mitt is a multi-millionaire, that’s a nice area to be in, especially considering that much of the middle class is taxed at a rate of 30-35 perecent! And, if Romney is elected and allowed to institute his recommended tax policies, his tax rate will dramatically drop while the tax rate for the middle class will remain virtually unchanged. And the tax rate for the poor will actually go up! Moreover, Romney’s tax plan will add tens of billions of dollars to the deficit. So much for the deficit and debt issues.

Voter support for these two only shows that Teapublicans are not really for anything. They’re simply against Obama. And many of them don’t even know why.

Posted in Current Events, Religion, Teapublicans, President Obama, Taxes, Deficit, Labor, Politics | Print | No Comments »

5. January 2012 by admin.

In every field or endeavor, there are people who have difficulty with the truth. Most of us tell the occasional little white lie, often to keep from hurting another’s feelings. Many of us tell lies to make us feel better or to explain a mistake. And then there are chronic, sociopathic liars who make statements that are provably false.

It’s in the latter category where Teapublican candidates, Fox News Channel hosts, religious conservatives and their supporters reside.

Want to kill Medicare? You vote to replace it with vouchers then tell your constituents that you voted to “save” it. Want to lower taxes for the wealthy? You re-position attempts to eliminate tax subsidies and create fairness as “Class Warfare.” Want to kill the EPA? You tell people that environmental regulations are “killing job creation.” Want to help your corporate funders privatize government agencies? You talk about “government waste” and let corporations cherry-pick the most profitable functions. Want to distract voters from your role in the collapse of our economy? You blame it on the poor, minorities and unions. Want to get rid of ATF and the new Consumer Financial Protection Agency? You simply block the appointment of the agencies’ directors. Want to make President Obama a one-term president? You block virtually every job creating initiative then tell people that his economic policies have failed.

The load of B.S. coming from Teapublicans would fertilize every planet in our solar system.  And it’s growing by the minute.

How do they get away with such blatant, provably false claims? They count on creating anger and mistrust in government. They count on people who are uninformed or misinformed (in other words, Fox News viewers). They count on voters who won’t take the little bit of time needed to research their outrageous claims.

Will their lies work again in 2012? How informed are you? How about your friends and neighbors?

Posted in Culture, President Obama, Privatization, Teapublicans, Taxes, Labor, Economy, Medicare, Government, Politics, Environment | Print | No Comments »

23. December 2011 by admin.

Before President Obama was even sworn into office, our economy and housing markets completely imploded. The economic collapse was labeled the Great Recession – the worst economy since the Great Depression. After the Bush-endorsed bank bailout, President Obama rescued our automotive industry and requested a stimulus bill to get our economy moving again. In requesting the stimulus bill, he said he hoped it would reduce unemployment, holding it to 8 percent or less. Yet despite the stimulus, unemployment soared to more than 9 percent and Republicans denounced the stimulus as an expensive failure.

On the surface, it would seem Republicans were right. However, it is now obvious that President Obama was fighting against a stacked deck – the result of inaccurate reporting. More than two years after Obama took office, the Congressional Budget Office released data showing that the original collapse was far worse than originally reported. More recently, the National Realtors Association admitted that sales of existing homes have been overstated.

The new data means that the stimulus bill was far from a failure. Rather it was woefully inadequate. Had Congressional Republicans agreed to the original, larger stimulus, we might have seen the economy rebound by now with greatly reduced unemployment. Instead, Republicans fought for a smaller stimulus, and many fought for no stimulus at all!

Moreover, Republicans have blocked every attempt to improve the economy. They have blocked increased regulation of the financial industry to prevent future meltdowns. They have blocked any and every attempt to force the wealthy to pay their fair share of taxes. They have blocked every attempt to remove anachronistic tax deductions for oil companies. They have blocked attempts to remove tax incentives for corporations that ship jobs overseas. They have invoked the filibuster a record number of times. They have blocked a record number of judicial and department nominees.

Teapublicans have done everything possible to make President Obama a one-term president, regardless of the harm they cause to the economy and the nation in the process. All of this has become abundantly clear.

The only remaining questions are whether or not American voters are smart enough to recognize the backstabbing for what it is. And whether or not they will make Teapublicans pay.

Posted in Current Events, Teapublicans, President Obama, Taxes, Government, Politics, Economy | Print | No Comments »