Calling all George Zimmermans.

Displaying its continuing contempt for the federal government, the Arizona legislature is considering a bill that would put more guns on our border in the hands of a volunteer militia under the direction of Governor Brewer. The proposed law known as SB1083, if passed and signed into law by our scorpion-eating governor, would create an “Arizona Special Missions Unit” at the bargain price of $1.4 million dollars.

The militia would consist entirely of volunteers who would provide their own weapons, except those which may be requisitioned by the governor from the Dept. of Defense.  Of course, that would be no problem as the state is filled with heavily armed zealots with itchy trigger fingers.  Indeed, the existing armaments of many Arizona civilians would be the envy of many of the world’s armies.

The bill would permit the unit to apprehend suspects and seize property.  It would also provide immunity from prosecution for the volunteers for their actions while “on duty.”  The bill provides for payment of up to $100 per day while on duty and up to $50 for one day of training per month.

Teapublican sponsors of the bill say it will aide the US Border Patrol and National Guard in stopping illegal immigration. But given the fact that the AZ Lege is on the verge of passing another “birther” bill, one assumes Governor Brewer might take her finger wagging to the next level and direct the unit to arrest President Obama on his next visit.

More realistically, the bill is likely to loose dozens of Dirty Harry wannabes in the mold of George Zimmerman on our international border.  (George Zimmerman is, of course, the Sanford, Florida neighborhood watch captain who trailed an unarmed teenager and allegedly gunned him down in “self-defense.”)

What could possibly go wrong with that?

The Real Three Stooges.

The Three Stooges movie, which will soon be opening at a theater near you, is puzzling in many ways.  Why try to recreate a trio so iconic to American culture?  Is Hollywood so devoid of creativity that it can’t find something new?  More important, if you are going to make such a movie why not cast the starring roles with a contemporary trio of individuals who, in their own way, are every bit as comedic as the originals?

With apologies to Moe Howard, Curly Howard and Larry Fine, certainly the movie producers could do no better than Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum.

For months, these three have appeared in a hilarious television series on most of the major networks.  They have toured the country displaying their comedic talents to millions.  They have presented statements and ideas even more outrageous than the originals.  Moreover, they need no writers.  They seem to think up this stuff all by themselves!

All that we could hope for is that they add some slapstick physical comedy to their routines.  How hilarious would it be to see Newt poke Rick in the eyes?  Or to see Mitt slap Newt’s head and stomp Rick’s foot?  How could it fail?

The actors in the new feature film have some big shoes to fill.

Trayvon Martin Murder Shows Danger Of Carrying Handguns.

No matter what happens to the “neighborhood watch captain” who gunned down an unarmed 17-year-old in Florida, two things are clear:  A promising young man’s life has been cut tragically short, and those who carry guns are all too inclined to use them.

Despite NRA claims, handguns in the hands of untrained citizens pose a greater danger to innocent people and to themselves than to violent criminals; a fact that is overwhelmingly supported by gun violence statistics.

In my opinion, there are two types of people who choose to carry handguns: 1 – Those who are seeking trouble.  2 – Those who have an irrational fear of others, particularly those who look different.  It appears the Florida shooter fits both categories.

George Zimmerman reported a “suspicious” person to 911.  But despite being told by the police dispatcher to avoid the young man, he followed Trayvon Martin with his gun drawn and he shot him.  We don’t know Mr. Zimmerman’s state of mind.  And we don’t know what led him to shoot.  But we do know that the shooting was unnecessary.  George Zimmerman could, and should, have kept his distance and allowed police to do their jobs.

So what now?

The best way to pay tribute to this young man is to do our best to ensure that others aren’t victimized by gun-toting Dirty Harry wannabes.  We can start by making sure that George Zimmerman is charged with murder (manslaughter at minimum).  Since 911 calls prove that Zimmerman pursued Martin, a claim of self-defense should not be an option.  Next, Florida’s law needs to be changed to require the shooter to prove that he shot in self-defense.  Not the other way around.  Ideally, we would also eliminate all handguns in the US.  Unfortunately, that genie is out of the bottle.  There are simply too many to destroy.  But we can discourage people from carrying handguns.  And we can require anyone who owns a handgun to obtain training and a license so that we can minimize the number of George Zimmerman’s on our streets.

Why should it be more difficult for someone to obtain a license to operate a car than to carry a handgun?

How Long Will US Offer Unquestioned Support Of Israel?

I recognize that merely asking the question is highly controversial.  I am also well aware of the horrors experienced by the Jewish people and I am very sympathetic.  But their experiences are not entirely unique.  Armenians, Cambodians, Gypsies, Hungarians, Native Americans, Poles, Ukranians, Russians, Rwandans, Sudanese and many other groups also have been the victims of genocide.  Yet, those groups have not enjoyed the same level of support from the US.

So what makes Israel unique?

Certainly, Israel deserved our backing following its formation after World War II.  But since the 1967 Six Day War, Israel’s military power has been unchallenged in the region.  It still faces threats, but with a modern armament including, by most accounts, nuclear weapons, it is more than capable of standing on its own.

Make no mistake. I have no issue with our continued sale of weapons to Israel so that it can continue to defend itself.  But I see no need for the US to continue to pay for those weapons.  Moreover, facing our own economic problems, I see little need to continue additional economic assistance given Israel’s high standard of living as compared to the rest of the world.

In 2010, Israel’s standard of living ranked 47th out of 194 nations.  And, according to the Human Development Index which compares life expectancy, literacy, education and standard of living, Israel ranked 17th in 2011.  That places Israel ahead of Belgium, Austria, France, Finland, Spain, Italy and many other advanced nations.

My biggest reason to question our blind allegiance is the growing belligerence of Israeli leaders.  Rather than being a victim, Israel has begun to more closely resemble the mischievious little brother who causes problems knowing that big brother (the US) will come to its aid and clean up its messes.

For example, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has allowed Israeli settlements to continue unabated on the West Bank.  Israel continues to make life extremely difficult for residents of Gaza, and its policy of disproportionate response to Palestinian attacks continues to stir regional anger.  Our Israeli friends have even deemed it necessary to send spies to uncover US military secrets.  Moreover, it would seem that Israel has little reason to negotiate with Palestinians as long as its security is assured by the world’s only superpower.

Ignoring US and EU requests for patience, Netanyahu is now threatening a pre-emptive strike on Iran’s nuclear program.  If Israel acts on those threats, it could well lead to further destablization of the Middle East, to cause Iran to fund regional dictators and terrorists who oppose the US, to cause a new civil war between Shiite and Sunni Muslims, and to dramatically increase world oil prices. In short, an attack on Iran could turn out much worse than President Bush’s misadventures in Iraq.

Who wouldn’t want that?

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.

Corporate America’s Shadow Government

Ever wonder why, when Arizona passes an anti-immigrant bill, suddenly similar bills show up in other state legislatures? Or why, as North Carolina legislators introduce a Voter ID bill designed to suppress minority and student votes, similar bills are making their way through dozens of other states?

It’s not coincidence. And it’s not merely some sort of copycat, legislative follow-the-leader. It’s orchestrated by an organization called ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council).

Sponsored by large corporations, ALEC describes itself as “a membership organization of state legislators which favors federalism and conservative public policy solutions.” More accurately, ALECWatch.org describes the group as “a screen for hundreds of big corporations and trade associations to advance their legislative agendas in state capitols from coast to coast.”

Membership of ALEC’s Private Enterprise Board reads like a Who’s Who of big, greedy corporations and conservative special interest groups: CenterPoint360, Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Reynolds American, Wal-Mart, Johnson&Johnson, PhRMA, KraftFoods, AT&T, UPS, ExxonMobil, Altria, State Farm, and, of course, the now infamous Koch Industries, to name but a few.

Here’s how it works: ALEC maintains a staff of “scholars”, lawyers and conservative ideologues who write legislation on behalf of its corporate sponsors. It then distributes the proposed bills for its legislative members to introduce in every state legislature in America. Often the legislators don’t even read the bills which carry their names until after they’ve introduced them. An example is a Florida legislator who, upon introducing a bill on the floor of the Florida statehouse, began reading the ALEC “for your eyes only” instructions that accompanied the bill.

In Arizona alone, ALEC members have introduced more than 50 ALEC–authored bills during the current legislative session. These bills read like a robber baron’s wish list, ranging from cutting corporate taxes to eliminating collective bargaining to privatizing more prisons to eliminating regulations and public oversight of corporations.

There are no comparable organizations for private citizens and progressives. Indeed, ALEC’s website brags that “ALEC is the only state legislative organization that adopts policies and creates model legislation for its members to use in their states. To date, ALEC has nearly 1,000 pieces of model legislation.”

And you probably thought your legislators were elected to work for you! To learn more, read the report on ALEC by Defenders of Wildlife and the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Right Wing Attack Pig.

That may seem cruel, but to call Rush-To-The-Pharmacy Limbaugh a right wing attack dog would be an insult to dogs. Even junk yard dogs. For years, Limbaugh has made millions from his vitriolic attacks on liberals. But this past week he unleashed his disgusting mouth on a new target:  Women.

Following Sandra Fluke’s testimony before an unofficial Congressional committee (Teapublicans refused to let her, or any other woman, testify before the official committee hearing) on the medical need for contraceptives, he chose to label the 30-year-old college student a “slut” and a “prostitute.” He asserted that the reason she needed her insurance company to pay for contraception is that she’s “having so much sex” she couldn’t afford to pay for contraception herself. He then offered to buy aspirin for every female college student in Georgetown to place between their knees as a form of birth control.

A few days later, he continued to attack Fluke by saying “If we’re going to pay for your contraceptives and thus pay for you to have sex, we want something for it. We want you to post the videos online so we can all watch.”

So, in addition to being a well-known drug addict, he must also be a pervert. Could it be that he’s trying to cover up his own sexual inadequacies? Or is he simply angry that few women would want this Jabba The Hut impersonator to climb on top of them?

Update: The furor over Limbaugh’s comments have resulted in the loss of numerous sponsors for his radio show. And the reaction has become so intense, for the first time in memory, he posted an apology for his “choice of words” on his website. But it seems to be much too little too late.  Advertisers continue to disassociate themselves from Rush.  And women have turned on the GOP.

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.

Tell Teapublicans To Shove It.

Now that the Teapublican legislators of Virginia have passed a bill requiring women seeking an abortion to submit to a vaginal ultrasound, I would suggest a companion bill.  The new bill would require the male legislators of Virginia and Congressman Dan Issa, along with his all-male panel which testified on female contraception, to have an ultrasound wand shoved up their rectums in search of a brain.

Further, I propose that the anti-woman, anti-middle class, anti-Obama, anti-everything Teapublican presidential candidates be subjected to the same procedure.  It’s unlikely that the doctors would find a single brain among them.

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?