He’s Not Known As McNasty For Nothing.

Senator John McCain is often referred to as an independent-minded maverick and national hero.

The reality is that he’s a self-centered plutocrat who has a very distant relationship with the truth.  Indeed, when you see McNasty up close as one of his constituents, you realize the man will say and do anything to be elected and to gain power.  The most recent example is his unwarranted attack on UN Ambassador Susan Rice. Ignoring the facts, he belittled her, saying that she’s not very bright.  He unfairly blamed her for misleading Americans on the cause of the attack on the US consulate in Libya.  And he threatened to filibuster if she is nominated for the position of Secretary of State.

Why would he make such unwarranted statements about someone who has loyally and capably served her nation?  Two words:  Personal gain.

Fact is, since Mitch McConnell and the other Senate Republicans settled upon their scorched earth policy of blocking and filibustering virtually every Democratic initiative, McCain has become irrelevant.  There have been no opportunities to be the maverick and cast the decisive vote.  Indeed, few people now pay attention to him.  Not even his Arizona constituents.  He simply has little to offer.

Moreover, McCain is about to be term-limited out of his leadership role on the important Senate Armed Services Committee, a move that will make him even less important.

What to do?  What to do?

In true McNasty style, the senator decided to throw Rice under the bus in order to offer himself up as the leader of a Watergate-style select committee that would allow him to conduct a wide-ranging witch hunt into every nook and cranny of the Obama administration.  Of course, it would also allow him to, once again, sit in the limelight.

Instead of being given such power, McCain should be shown the door.

Another “Scandal” Blows Up In GOP Faces.

Determined to find a scandal worthy of impeachment (or at the very least, a scandal that would cause great embarrassment to the Obama administration), GOP leaders first seized on Solyndra only to discover that the process for the government-backed loan first began during the Bush administration.

Frustrated, they then turned to Fast and Furious only to find that responsibility for the operation focused on the Phoenix office of the ATF.

Now GOP hopes revolve around the deaths of four diplomats in Benghazi.

Because Susan Rice stated on several talk shows that the deaths were likely due to a spontaneous attack by Muslims angry over a despicable video, the GOP sensed an opportunity.  They used Rice’s statements to “prove” that the administration lied and is now in full cover-up mode.  Senator John McNasty even has called for a full Watergate-style commission to investigate the “cover-up.”

There’s just one fly in the ointment.

Former CIA director, General David Petraeus testified before Congress that there was no attempt by the White House to mislead.  He stated that the report on which Rice based her statements, was drafted through an interagency process, not a political process.  According to Rep. Adam Schiff who sat in on the hearings, “The general was adamant there was no politicization of the process, no White House interference or political agenda; that Rice’s comments in television interviews “reflected the best intelligence at the time that could be released publicly.”

Oops!  Instead of a scandal it would seem that GOP leaders only have another layer of egg on their faces.

Can We Finally Flush The Trickle Down Theory?

The notion that cutting taxes for the wealthy somehow creates jobs has never been proven to work.  Not once.  Never.  Ever.

In fact, there is much evidence to the contrary.

Many economists and non-partisan academic studies have pronounced it a fraud.  Not even the Reagan-era budget directors who resurrected the idea from the dust bin of history believe in it anymore.

Indeed, one need only compare job creation during the Clinton administration with that of the George W. Bush administration to see the fallacy of tax cuts as a job creating stimulus.  When Clinton raised the top marginal rate to more than 39 percent, the economy grew dramatically.  When Bush cut the top marginal rate to 35 percent, the economy began its slide over the cliff.

There’s more.

The idea failed in the early 1900s when it was known as Horse and Sparrow economics.  And contrary to the the notion that low taxes create jobs, the Eisenhower administration grew the economy when the top marginal rate was 91 percent!

Despite all of this evidence, Republicans continue to claim that tax cuts create jobs.  Why?  Because Republicans sold the soul of their party to the very wealthy and to large, multinational corporations.  They have to find some way to sell this lame idea to the poor and middle class voters.  So, like a sleazy carnival barker, they loudly proclaim that it is the miracle cure for every struggling economy.

What they fail to mention is that the real miracle will be if it ever works.

Proof That Tax Breaks For The Rich Do Not Create Jobs.

For years, economists have scoffed at the notion that tax breaks for the wealthy benefit the rest of society.  The policy failed in the early 1900s when it was known as Horse and Sparrow economics.  And it failed in the 1980s when it was called Trickle Down economics. Indeed, even the architects of Reagan’s economic policy now admit the policy is a failure.

The notion was further debunked in the 1990s when President Clinton raised taxes on the wealthy resulting in millions of new jobs.

But evidence has never stopped Teapublicans from claiming that the only way to create jobs is to cut taxes for the wealthy and multi-national corporations.  They continue to claim that tax cuts are the only incentives for the so-called “job creators.”  Of course, this year’s crop of Teapublican candidates is pursuing the same policy.  They’re counting on voters who are frustrated by the slow recovery from the enormous economic crisis they created to buy into the same old malarkey again.

Teapublicans deny that they are responsible for the crisis and that their obstructionism is responsible for the slow recovery.  They say, “Trust us.  Tax cuts will work this time.” 

Unfortunately for Teapublicans, the non-partisan Congressional Research Service created a report that, once again, found that lower marginal tax rates for the wealthy have no effect on economic growth and job creation.   So what did the Teapublican leadership do with this information?  Did it sway their opinions?  Did they modify their policy?

Certainly not.

According to a story in The New York Times, Senate Teapublicans led by Mitch McConnell persuaded the Congressional Research Service to withdraw the report.  After all, they wouldn’t want the voting public to know the truth!

What Lessons Will Be Learned From This Election?

If Romney and the Teapublicans win this election, it will have been demonstrated that you don’t have to offer better ideas to become president.  You can merely lie, cheat and buy your way into the White House.

If Romney wins, it will have been shown that the road to the White House begins with questioning your opponent’s citizenship and patriotism.

Future candidates will be encouraged to lie about the incumbent’s every intention and motivation.  They will see the value of encouraging their party to block every proposal the incumbent puts forward, even if their own party recommended it; to block the majority of his nominations and appointments; to blame the president for their own party’s failures; to provide few details about their plans to govern; to constantly change positions to match the audience; to use every means possible to suppress votes; and to use unregulated SuperPACs to buy the election.

Of course, there are two other lessons to be learned; that what you have said and done in the past don’t really matter; and that you can hide your money offshore without consequences.  Some people will even call you a patriot for evading taxes.

Ask yourself:  Is this what our Founding Fathers intended?  Are these the lessons you want to teach your children and grandchildren?

The Cultural Pendulum.

During my 40+ years in advertising, I learned that our culture is like a pendulum.  It swings far in one direction then back an equal distance in the other direction.  However, it’s on a 360 degree axis, so it never comes back to quite the same place twice.

You can see this pendulum effect play out in many ways, including politics.

In the late 1800s and early 1900s, wealthy men such as J.P. Morgan, Cornelius Vanderbilt, and John D. Rockefeller wielded most of the political power.  These industrialists made billions off the backs of others.  They controlled their employees with an iron fist.  They controlled government the same way.

It was an age when workers, including children, were forced to labor in deplorable conditions.  They were paid little for back-breaking work in mines, in sweatshops, in factories and on railroads.  There were no safety and environmental regulations.  No labor unions.  No salary negotiations. No retirement safety nets.

Following the labor strikes of the early 1900s and following the Great Depression, things began to change.  People realized that they had been abandoned by the powerful and the wealthy.  The need for collective action became apparent.

Sadly, the pendulum is swinging back in the direction of the plutocrats; the so-called “job creators.”  We’ve been through decades of union busting.  Middle class jobs have been exported to other countries in search of ever lower labor costs.  Financial, environmental and safety regulations are under attack.  The top one percent has enjoyed an ever-increasing share of the national wealth while the wages of the poor and the middle class have declined.

More disturbingly, there is evidence that the pendulum is accelerating toward the right.  The wealthy and powerful have been emboldened.  The mere fact that a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination felt comfortable promoting the exploitation of child labor during the Republican debates should send a chill down everyone’s spine.  Now business owners and corporate executives are even demanding that their employees vote for Mitt Romney or be fired.

If the Republicans take control of the White House and Congress, our nation will swing even further toward the Horse and Sparrow economy; an economy based on the notion that if you feed enough oats to the horse (the wealthy and the multi-national corporations), some will pass through and end up on the road for the sparrows (you and me).

“Fraudulent,” “Fantasy,” “Con Game,” “Mathematically Impossible.”

These are the words used to describe the Romney-Ryan budget plan by economists, The Washington Post, the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center and Bloomberg News.

Mitt says his plan will cut taxes for all Americans, increase defense spending and still cut the deficit.  And, get this; he claims that his plan will be “revenue neutral.” He says that the costs will be offset by the elimination of tax deductions.  Yet he steadfastly refuses to provide details.  The only cuts he’s mentioned are funding for Public Broadcasting and Planned Parenthood.

In fact, after more than a year of campaigning for the office of President of the United States, Mitt has not provided any numbers for his plan…until tonight.

During the second debate with President Obama, Mitt announced the number five…in reference to his 5-point plan for the economy.  But don’t expect Mitt to provide any details for that plan, especially with regard to his budget figures.

He either can’t, or won’t.

Romney can’t explain his budget plan.  Liein’ Ryan can’t explain it.  And one of the campaign’s top surrogates can’t explain it.  When Sen. Marco Rubio was asked by Lawrence O’Donnell to name the tax deductions that would be eliminated, he admitted he couldn’t name a single one.

Instead of offering details about his plan, all Mitt says is “trust me.”  Now, tell me, Mitt, why would we do that?  You say one thing today. Then a day or two later, you say something else.  You’ve had at least four answers to every question.  Indeed, you’ve had more positions than the Kama Sutra.

When it comes to your economic plan, Mitt, I’ll trust the opinions of President Obama, President Clinton, most independent media, and non-partisan economists.

Undermining Democracy.

For more than 40 years, the Republican Party has been working to undermine our elections.  It first became apparent with the Watergate break-in, which was an obvious attempt to steal an election and subvert our constitution.

But the Republican strategy actually began a few years earlier, when Republican Vice-President Spiro Agnew used his position to create partisan distrust of our news media.  The attack on the media gained steam as ensuing Republican administrations appointed directors to the Federal Communications Commission with instructions to repeal the Fairness Doctrine.

They succeeded in 1987, giving birth to hyper-partisan TV networks such as Fox News Channel and right wing radio hosts such as Rush Limbaugh.

In addition, Republicans began a partisan attack on our judicial system.  Once based on merit, the Supreme Court was changed by Reagan, George H. W Bush and George W. Bush when they nominated ideologues such as Thomas and Scalia to make decisions based on conservative “values.”  They were rewarded with Supreme Court rulings that equate money with free speech and corporations with individuals.

Of course, these decisions assured the Republican Party of an overwhelming campaign advantage funded by their multi-national corporate masters.

In the House of Representatives, former Speaker Newt Gingrich began a cleansing of moderate Republicans in order to assure party-line votes on virtually every issue.  And, in the Senate, Republicans began wielding the filibuster in record numbers to force Democratics to gain a super majority on even the most mundane of bills, such as nominations for Treasury, State, EPA, Education, Justice, ATF, and federal judgeships.

In order to win elections, Republicans created divisive issues villifying minorities, immigrants and gays, then loaded the airwaves with negative ads in hopes of disgusting voters, thereby suppressing votes by all but their most right wing base.

When they lost by a landslide in 2008, Republicans tried to convince voters that the elections were stolen without providing a shred of actual evidence.  They then set about creating laws and reducing polling hours to suppress votes in mostly Democratic areas by demanding photo IDs that are sometimes expensive and hard to obtain.

Republicans have tried to bust unions in hopes of ending union campaign contributions to Democratic candidates.  They have tried to defund Planned Parenthood, not just because they disagree with abortion, but because it represents a reliable Democratic voting bloc.  They have also tried to defund public broadcasting in hopes of destroying the last truly independent news network.

Republicans have even defunded education at every level.  After all, an uneducated and uninformed electorate is more easily deceived by Fox News and other Republican-controlled media.

Despite all of this, surveys show that if every eligible voter went to the polls, President Obama and Democrats would win handily.  Let’s make sure enough of these people vote to spoil the Republican strategy.

Ayn Rand And Liein’ Ryan.

In the 1950s and 60s, Ayn Rand authored a series of books which focused on the virtues of individualism versus collectivism. Having grown up in Russia and the Soviet Union, she believed that government, religion, social organizations, even charities are evil.

For those of us who were raised in democracies during the 1930s, 40s, 50s and 60s, it was difficult to imagine the appeal of such a narrow-minded, selfish philosophy.  Yet congressman and vice-presidential candidate, Paul Ryan, has repeatedly credited Rand as his inspiration for public service.

Of course, he says he doesn’t accept all of Rand’s beliefs.  After all, Rand was a pro-choice aethist while Ryan says he’s a pro-life Catholic.

Moreover, Rand, in the last years of her life, decided that collectivism wasn’t all bad, especially when she could cash Social Security checks and let Medicare pay for her healthcare.  Yet these are the very programs that Ryan wants to get rid of.

But maybe Ryan isn’t so different from Rand, after all.  Although Ryan hates the federal government, he happily cashes government checks for his congressional salary.  He gladly accepts his government-paid healthcare.  He works out in a government-owned gym.  And I’m betting that, if Ryan and his Teapublican buddies don’t kill Social Security and Medicare first, they’ll happily accept those benefits to go along with their government pensions.

It would seem that, in Ryan’s mind, government programs are only bad when the money goes to someone else.

I’m reminded of the true story of W.C. Fields.  Although he was an avowed aethist, a friend found him reading the Bible on his death bed.  When the friend asked why, Fields responded, “Looking for loopholes.”

To learn about more of Ryan’s lies, read The Teapublican Book of Lies available at Amazon.com and other on-line bookstores.

Hey, Darrell Issa, Investigate This!

Since Teapublicans took control of the House, Congressman Darrell Issa has used the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform to conduct investigations (witch hunts would be a more accurate description) intended to embarrass the Obama administration.

First, Issa went after Solyndra, but that investigation uncovered no wrongdoing and actually led back to the Bush administration (oops).  Next, he went after Fast and Furious, the ATF and the Department of Justice.  While he found problems with the Phoenix office of the ATF, he uncovered no wrongdoing by the DOJ or Secretary Eric Holder. 

Now Issa is threatening to investigate the Bureau of Labor Statistics September jobs report.  (After all, with the Teapublican stonewalling of the President’s jobs bills, how could the economy possibly have created so many jobs?)

But Issa and the rest of the Teapublican torch and pitchfork crowd are missing a real scandal.  In the midst of their investigation of State Department security policies following the murder of our ambassador to Libya, Teapublican Congressman Jason Chaffetz admitted that he and the GOP-controlled House had cut funding for embassy security prior to the attack.

Now that’s something worthy of a serious investigation.