What’s Your Definition Of Freedom?

If you listen to conservative talk radio, you’d think conservatives are the only ones who care about freedom.  They call themselves “patriots” and wrap themselves in the flag in a show of false superiority.  But, truth is, moderates and liberals want freedom, too.  The difference is in the way we define it.

For example, conservatives seem to believe freedom means being able to do whatever they want without restriction.  They seem to equate freedom with money…the more money the more freedom.  And some seem to believe the color of their skin gives them more freedom than others.

Some believe corporations should be free to exploit natural resources without regard to the quality of our air and water.  They believe corporations should be free to sell foods that slowly poison their customers.  They believe corporations should be free to sell any product no matter how flawed or dangerous.  And they believe corporations should be free to use their money and influence to control our government.

Moderates and liberals, on the other hand, believe corporations should be regulated to protect our families and our environment.

Many “conservatives” believe that they should be free to impose their religious and moral beliefs on others.  To tell others who to marry and who to love, and what they can do with their bodies.  Some believe they should be able to control who votes.

Some believe they should have the freedom to speed, to tailgate and to run red lights.  Some believe they have the right to ridicule and intimidate others.  Some believe they should be free to cheat, lie and steal.  Some believe freedom is tied to the barrel of a gun.

Others, like me, consider such people to be bullies and cowards.

That’s the difficult thing about freedom.  Everyone has a different definition.  With more than 300 million sharing this land, freedom requires compromise and we should never allow any ideology to co-opt it.  In fact, the only thing standing between your freedom and mine is government; the system of representation and laws our Founding Fathers had the wisdom to create.  We can’t permit conservatives to claim ownership of it.

The Legacy of Trayvon Martin.

Following his tragic murder, the circumstances of Trayvon Martin’s death have focused national attention on Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law authored by ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council).  It’s not as if the law is unique to Florida.  Like most of the thousands of bills ALEC has authored over the past 30 years, it was peddled to conservative legislators all over the country.  More than two dozen states have some version of the law.

Now that the publicity generated by Martin’s death has shone a bright light on ALEC, a growing number of the organization’s sponsors have severed ties with the group.  Coca-Cola, the Gates Foundation, Kraft Foods, McDonald’s, Pepsico, Wendy’s and Yum! Brands (A&W, KFC, Long John Silver’s and Taco Bell) have all announced they will no longer donate money to ALEC.

But we need to starve ALEC of all the funds it needs to control our legislatures.  We must keep writing ALEC sponsors. We must tell them that we will not support them as long as they support ALEC.  Ending ALEC, the Goldwater Institute and dozens of other such undemocratic organizations would be a great first step in taking back our government. 

And it would be a fitting tribute to the young man who was the victim of a senseless killing.

What If Teapublicans Get Their Way In 2012?

After watching their debates and reading the conservative legislation being pushed through Congress and our state legislatures, it’s clear that Teapublicans will not be satisfied until they:

– Replace Social Security with retirement accounts based on volatile stock markets.
– Replace Medicare with vouchers leaving seniors at the mercy of private insurers.
– Repeal “Obamacare” making health care unaffordable for 60 million people.
– Eliminate insurance coverage for contraception.
– Eliminate all forms of public assistance for the poor.
– Eliminate unemployment insurance.
– Replace progressive taxes with a flat tax to benefit the wealthy.
– Reduce or eliminate taxes for corporations.
– Eliminate the EPA allowing corporations to foul our air and water.
– Eliminate oil and gas regulations leading to more environmental disasters.
– Open national park lands, such as the Grand Canyon, to mining.
– Eliminate Wall Street regulations designed to prevent economic collapses.
– Eliminate the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that regulates credit cards.
– Eliminate the Federal Reserve.
– Eliminate the Department of Labor along with labor unions.
– Eliminate pensions and benefits for public employees.
– Eliminate the Department of Education along with public schools.
– Mandate that schools ban the teaching of evolution.
– Eliminate the US Postal Service.
– Eliminate funding for women’s health care through Planned Parenthood.
– Eliminate all subsidies for the development of alternative energy.
– Eliminate funding for the National Endowment for the Arts.
– Eliminate funding for National Public Radio and Public Television.
– Privatize prisons, roads, parks and virtually every other public entity.
– Eliminate all restrictions on firearms and ammunition.
– Eliminate all restrictions on hunting.
– Repeal the Constitution’s establishment clause that prevents a state-sponsored religion.

Seriously, is this the kind of country you want?

A Truly Momentous Court Decision.

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.

The New GOP = God’s Official Party?

Does God take sides in politics? Does He select candidates? Does She choose the issues? Apparently, the GOP thinks so. For more than 30 years, conservative politicians have pandered to evangelical “Christians.” They have bowed at the altar of the likes of Jerry Falwell, James Dobson and Pat Robertson. In return, evangelical pastors have preached conservative “values” from the pulpit.  And bishops have condemned those with whom they disagree.

Teapublicans have become so secure in their faith that God intended the US to be a God-fearing, anti-government, anti-tax, anti-regulation, anti-union, anti-gay, anti-minority, anti-abortion, anti-science, anti-education nation, they have convinced themselves that all Democrats and liberals are evil…the followers of Satan.

They hear this nonsense every day on “Christian” radio and television. They hear venonmous diatribes from Rush “Boss Hog” Limbaugh and other right wing radio hosts.  And they hear the daily rants and Teapublican talking points of Fox News Channel.  All of this has made conservativism every bit as much a religion to them as Catholicism and Protestantism.

Teapublicans have convinced themselves that every American will be rich as soon as they get the “big-government, high-taxation” Democrats out of their lives.  They believe public education is a liberal tool intended to indoctinate their children in anti-Christian beliefs such as evolution.  They believe that, if climate change really exists, it’s simply God’s way of testing the faithful.  They believe…well, they just believe.

As a result, they cannot ever allow themselves to compromise with the “evil-doers” on the left.  After all, that would be akin to compromising with the Devil himself.

Teapublican Mandated Nonsense.

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.

What Is NRA’s Endgame?

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.

The Teapublican Time Machine.

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.

Separation Clause Doesn’t Apply To Contraceptive Mandate.

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?

Are We Now Officially Living In A Police State?

When the American public watched televised scenes of non-violent black marchers being attacked by baton-wielding police and their dogs in the 1950s south, the public’s disgust virtually assured the end of the Jim Crow era.

When students at Kent State University were shot by National Guard troops for demonstrating against the Vietnam War, public outrage made the end of the war inevitable.

So what are we to make of the general indifference our citizens have shown toward the police brutality at Occupy Wall Street demonstrations?

If you haven’t been paying attention, New York police have routinely emptied pepper spray containers in the faces of non-violent demonstrators before hauling them off to jail. During one example of police brutality, an Iraq veteran confronted officers by asking, “Why are you doing this? You are supposed to be serving our citizens.” He went on to explain that he was in the Military Police in Iraq, and the military never treated Iraqis this way.

On the other side of the country, witnesses say another Iraq veteran was critically injured by police as he was demonstrating against Wall Street and the 1%. The Oakland, California police claim they were merely breaking up the demonstration with the use of rubber bullets and tear gas canisters because of “unsafe sanitary conditions.”

In other words, we gassed and beat you to ensure your safety!

Despite these horrible incidents, most of our citizens (particularly Teapublicans) have reacted with a collective ho-hum. Why? Perhaps it’s because scenes of police abusing demonstrators have become common-place.

Our Constitution guarantees the right to assembly and free speech. Yet many in Congress, the media, and our increasingly militarized city police departments seem to have conveniently forgotten that.

Instead, they blame the protestors for police violence.

It’s time for all US citizens to look at the police violence and ask, “Is this the future of our country? Are we now willing to accept brutality from Kevlar helmeted police armed with tear gas, assault rifles and even tanks? Are we willing to concede that corporations have freedom of speech, but ordinary citizens do not? Is it okay for big corporate interests to bankrupt our economy, ask the government to bail them out then pay themselves millions in bonuses with taxpayer money? Are we okay with living in a police state?

And if the answers are yes, what can we expect in the future?  Scenes similar to the military crackdown in Syria? Threats by our own Gaddafis to kill protestors like rats? Or a US citizen blocking a column of US tanks in a futile attempt to stop a violent attack on peaceful protestors? Where does it stop?