Category Archives: Government

America’s Epidemic Of Head-Up-The-Butt Disease.

Posted on by

There are many things we know that are detrimental to our society, but for a variety of reasons (mostly political) we refuse to correct them.

For example, we know that it’s dangerous to text while driving, but many do it anyway.  We know that many military contractors have been found guilty of defrauding the government, yet we continue to reward them with multi-billion dollar contracts. We know that abstinence-only programs do not help prevent teen pregnancies, but we cut funding for sex education and easy access to contraceptives.  We also know that early education programs greatly improve a child’s future, yet many are trying to defund them.

Similarly, the world’s scientists have warned us of the dangers of climate change caused by man.  Still, we refuse to address the problems even when experiencing extreme weather.  And we know that mass killings are made possible by unrestricted access to military-style, semi-automatic weapons.

All of these issues could be fixed.  It only takes a will to do so.  Yet we continue to listen to those who profit from these problems. 

We accept the oil industry’s arguments that lessening our dependence on renewable energies will be costly and result in lost jobs.  We accept the absurd notion of “clean” coal being marketed by the coal industry.  And we accept the fear-based arguments of gun manufacturers and the National Rifle Association that “Guns don’t kill people.  People kill people.”  That may be true, but semi-automatic weapons with large-capacity magazines make it much easier.

When’s the last time you read about a mass killing committed by a lunatic carrying a single-shot rifle or a 6-shot revolver?

Of course, the NRA argues that there will be less violence when everyone is armed.  But if you take your head out of your nether regions, you’ll discover the obvious flaws in that argument.  Do you have to carry a weapon with you at all times?  In church?  In school?  In the swimming pool?

So come on, America, stop limiting your view to your inner colons.  Pull your heads out of your butts and start examining the world around you.

Let’s Help Texas Secede.

Posted on by

On several occasions, Texas Gov. Rick Perry suggested that the Republic of Texas might secede from the United States.  He meant it as a threat, but after first ridiculing the idea, I’ve come to embrace it.

Let’s consider the benefits.

If Texas, Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Tennessee (Yes, I know this isn’t all of the original Confederacy, but the others have better embraced their statehood.) were allowed to secede, the level of education in the US would improve overnight.  At the same time, the number of impoverished would plummet.  We would also improve the United States’ international rankings with regard to incarceration and capital punishment.

Moreover, the US would dramatically reduce the number of assault rifles and handguns within its borders.  We would rid ourselves of the evangelical crackpots on the Texas school board responsible for rewriting textbooks to whitewash history.  We would improve the percentage of our population with health insurance. And since most of the Tea Party crackpots in Congress come from the former Confederacy, the level of political discourse would likely improve.

I know this plan seems radical, but I think it best.  Many of the former Confederate states have long been openly hostile to the federal government, even threatening to “exercise their 2nd Amendment rights.”  In Arizona, there are legislative bills calling for state sovereignty of national parks and all federal lands.  And many of these states have refused to accept the legitimacy of the Affordable Care Act despite a Supreme Court ruling.

For the states that do secede, they finally could have the theocratic government they seem to so desire.  They could completely ignore science.  They would no longer have to accept the billions in federal money that have been thrust upon them to provide food and medicine for their poor.  And unless they continue their hostility to foreign visitors, they could replace Mexico and Jamaica as warm weather destinations for US tourists.

Of course, the plan is not without downsides.  We would have to move many of our military bases to Union states.  Football could suffer without Texas and Florida athletes, but since we already embrace foreign nationals for basketball and baseball, we could make accommodation for football players.  We would lose much of the domestic oil production and refineries, but all of that oil and gas is sold on world markets, anyway.  And since I live in Arizona, I’d have to sell my home at a loss in order to move back to the US.

Nevertheless, I encourage you to give my plan serious thought.  If you do, I’m confident you’ll see that the many benefits outweigh the negatives.

Batsh*t Crazy Brotherhood.

Posted on by

Contrary to Senator McCain’s statements (Welcome back to the high road, Senator), the highest levels of our Government have been infiltrated by a sinister organization.  But it’s not the Muslim Brotherhood or any other outside group.

It’s by the Batsh*t Crazy Brotherhood, otherwise known as the Tea Party.

Michele Bachmann, Steve King, Trent Franks, Louie Gohmert, Thomas Rooney, Lynn Westmoreland, Joe Walsh, Rand Paul, Ben Quayle, Paul Gosar and a host of other crackpots have infiltrated our Congress!  They’ve blocked legislation necessary for the operation of our government.  They even tried, and failed, to force the US into defaulting on its debt.  Nothing could be more damaging to the security of our nation.

Now they are creating fear of the Muslim Brotherhood in order to conceal their own actions.

It’s time to declare war on these deceitful infiltrators.  We must root out this menace to our nation.  By voting for their opponents in the November elections we can not only send a message in favor of patriotism.  We can promote sanity and civility by sending all of these out-patients back to the sanatoriums from whence they came.

What Mitt Believes In.

Posted on by

It’s ironic that Mitt Romney’s campaign slogan is “Believe in America,” because he obviously doesn’t.

What does he believe in?

In a word, money.  His money.  It doesn’t matter if it’s in dollars, francs, pounds, euros, rmb…whatever.  Mitt believes in possessing it.  Lots of it.  And he doesn’t like giving any of it away for taxes.  That’s why he’s used an assortment of tax havens and accounting tricks to keep his tax rate below that of most working people.

Of course, Mitt doesn’t mind that others have to make up for the taxes he dodges.  Based on his tenure with Bain Capital, he doesn’t mind that their jobs are shipped overseas, either.  Or that their companies are dissolved leaving them without jobs, benefits or pensions.

In fact, he’s already said that he’ll cut other jobs if elected president.  He wants to eliminate or combine numerous federal agencies, including the Department of Education and the Department of Housing and Urban Development.  He also wants to give his wealthy cronies a big tax cut; nevermind that the money to pay for it will come out of the pockets of the poor and middle class.

According to a new Joint Economic Committee study, the Romney-Ryan Budget Plan will increase taxes on those making $50,000-$100,000 by $1,300 per year.  It will cost those making $100,000-$200,000 $2,600 per year.  On the other hand, if you make $500,000-$1 million, you will get a check for $35,000.  And if you make more than $1 million, you’ll get a check for $285,000!

Moreover, it has been estimated that Romney’s proposed policies would create 800,000 jobs…overseas.  His tax cuts for corporations would reduce corporate tax revenue by more than $1 trillion over the next decade.  And, of course, he plans to repeal “Romneycare…er…Obamacare” increasing profits for insurance companies and big PhRMA.

Is it any wonder that Forbes magazine calls the Romney-Ryan Budget “A mistake of historic proportions?”

Where Are The Real Newsrooms?

Posted on by

The HBO program called Newsroom is terrific!  It portrays a news program that transforms itself from “human interest” style, ratings-driven drivel to a program dedicated to telling the truth.  In other words, it’s recreating the style of news that we enjoyed before the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine.

You see, under the Fairness Doctrine, broadcast media were bound by law to serve the public interest; in other words to tell the truth.  If a network or station failed to prove that it failed that standard, it could lose its license.

Yet it wasn’t necessary for news reporters such as Edward R. Murrow, Daniel Shore, Harry Reasoner, Walter Cronkite, David Brinkley, Chet Huntley and Dan Rather.  They needed no such incentive to tell the truth.  They were true newsmen.  They were not bound by ratings or the need to be first.  They were bound by the need to be right.

Unfortunately, when the Fairness Doctrine was repealed, that commitment disappeared.  Networks canned most of their news gathering staffs and focused on ratings.  At the same time, the mouths of Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage and others were unleashed to hammer away at their political opponents by telling any lies they found necessary.  Fox News Channel was created to fill the news void with innuendo, lies and half-truths on behalf of the GOP.

It can’t continue.

The job of a real newsroom is to tell people, not what they want to know, but what they need to know.  So enjoy HBO’s Newsroom while you can.  Listen to Jeff Daniels and imagine how much better off this nation would be if there were real news anchors like his character.  Imagine a new Fairness Doctrine that would chase liars like Limbaugh, Savage, Hannity, O’Reilly, Beck and company back into the swamps and caves where they belong.

Imagine an informed electorate.

Conservatives Strike Yet Another Blow Against Real Representation.

Posted on by

I’ve previously written about ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council), the organization sponsored by many of the nation’s largest corporations with the intent of writing much of the legislation proposed in state houses across the country.  ALEC brags that it writes approximately 1,000 bills a year for conservative legislators to sponsor.  This is how Arizona’s SB 1070 came into being – written by a Kansas lawyer for Corrections Corporation of America (a private prison firm) and ALEC, and sponsored by former AZ Senator Russell Pearce.

In other words, ALEC is more involved in legislation than our legislators.

Well, it turns out that ALEC is not the only such organization in America.  (No, there are no liberal or Democratic versions of ALEC.)  The other large conservative organization is Stateside Associates.

The home page of Stateside’s website states “Lean forward…we have your back.”  It says, “Stateside Associates offers deep expertise in the core services, strategies and execution of state and local government relations.  We help clients shape the public policy environment by knowing what is happening, who is involved and what tools are needed to influence the process.”

They help ensure that the interests of corporations outweigh the interests of individuals.

In addition to Stateside, there are many smaller conservative organizations such as the Goldwater Institute and the Center for Arizona Policy in Arizona.  All of these groups are more than lobbying firms paid to look after the affairs of corporate clients.  These are ideological groups intended to change our entire political system by writing laws for conservative legislators.

They need to go.

U…S…A! U…S…A…er, China!

Posted on by

Remember those chants after the US Olympic hockey team upset the Soviet Union?  We’ve come a long way since then.

Back then, our Olympic team’s uniforms were made in America.  But, today, our Olympic team’s uniforms are made in China like almost everything else we use.  The US Olympic Committee hired an American icon, Ralph Lauren, to design them.  Then he turned around and outsourced their manufacture to China.

Of course, many Americans are upset upon learning the news, including politicians on both sides of the aisle.  They called it an embarrassment.  They said our Olympic Committee should be ashamed.

But are they willing to do anything about it?

In fact, it’s Congress that is responsible for subsidizing corporations for sending jobs and money offshore.

Conservatives Trying To Steal Elections… Again.

Posted on by

For the past two years, Teapublican state legislatures have passed measures calling for photo IDs for voters.  They claim that, if you are required to have a license to drive, you should be required to have a photo ID to vote. (Of course, they don’t feel the same about those who carry guns.) They say their only interest is to eliminate voter fraud, especially by illegal immigrants.

Given the fact that there is virtually no proven voter fraud in this country that seems unlikely.  And anyone who is familiar with illegal immigrants knows that an attempt to vote is much too risky.  They would  never take the chance of calling attention to themselves for fear of getting caught.  For example, I recently asked a County Recorder in Arizona how many illegal immigrants have tried to vote in the county.  The answer was none. Moreover, I asked how many instances of voter fraud the county had uncovered in recent elections.  The answer was five.  All were caught.

Let’s get to the real reason for these new voter laws: Stealing elections.

Many of the voters who do not have photo IDs are likely to vote Democratic.  You see, many people in large cities, particularly in the inner cities do not have need for a driver’s license or a passport. They are often elderly, poor or students.  In the past, they have voted using voter registration cards, student IDs and other forms of identification.  Unless, the Department of Justice steps in, that will change.  And millions of voters will not be allowed to vote unless they obtain the proper kind of photo ID in time for this fall’s elections.

In Pennsylvania, it’s estimated that 750,000 eligible citizens do not currently possess identification cards issued by the state Department of Transportation.  That’s 9.2 percent of the vote!

To illustrate how unfair and absurd this new bill is, it will prevent all of the state’s Amish from voting, since their faith does not allow them to have their pictures taken.

Of course, Pennsylvania is not alone.  Voter purges are continuing in many other states, as well.  If they’re allowed to get away with it, we could see a repeat of 2000 when Vice-President Al Gore won the popular vote and lost the electoral vote as the result of voter suppression and dirty tricks in Florida.

What Roberts Knew About The Healthcare Ruling.

Posted on by

The primary thing that defines a nation is its rule of law, and that was very much in question with the Supreme Court decision on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.  After a long series of 5-4 decisions heavily weighted to the right, Roberts likely knew the very credibility of the Court was on the line when he ruled that the mandate was a tax, allowing the law to stand.

Even so, the decision merely gives the Court’s reputation a temporary reprieve.

With such overtly political “justices” as Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, the Court is still perceived as unduly biased toward the way-out-on-the-right-wing fringe of politics.  That perception began with the Court’s 2000 decision on Bush v. Gore which gave the presidency to the candidate with the fewest votes.  It has continued with a series of partisan decisions which have allowed elections to be sold to the highest bidder.

The conservatives on this partisan Court have shown a tendancy to argue cases out of both sides of their mouths to help their political causes, and they’ve shown disdain for long-standing tradition.

To wit, Clarence Thomas, whose wife was being paid to fight against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, refused to recuse himself from the case.  And, in a show of contempt for openness, he failed to list his wife’s job and income on his financial disclosure.

Scalia, a close buddy of Richard “The Dick” Cheney, has made numerous political statements that are unseemly for a Supreme Court justice.  One of the most bizzare was his assertion following the decision overturning most of Arizona’s SB 1070, that the entire law should have been upheld, likening it to the time when Southern states could exclude free blacks from their borders.

Scalia’s tendancy to mix justice with politics led columnist E. J. Dionne to write an opinion in The Washington Post calling for Scalia’s resignation.  Stating that Scalia cannot be a blatantly political actor and a justice at the same time, Dionne wrote, “So often, Scalia has chosen to ignore the obligation of a Supreme Court justice to be, and appear to be, impartial. He’s turned “judicial restraint” into an oxymoronic phrase.”

He went on to write, “Scalia should free himself to pursue his true vocation. We can then use his resignation as an occasion for a searching debate over just how political this Supreme Court has become.”

Justice Roberts’ deciding vote to uphold the Affordable Care Act would seem to have delayed that debate.  But, with Scalia and Thomas on the Court, likely not for long.

What Our Politicians Could Learn From A Lifeguard.

Posted on by

By now you’ve probably heard the story of Tomas Lopez, the Florida lifeguard who was fired for saving a life.  You see, he dared to save someone from a portion of the beach that wasn’t under contract by his employer, Jeff Ellis Management.

Of course, this story vividly illustrates the problems of outsourcing traditionally government jobs to private companies, but that’s another story.

It also shows that Tomas understands morality and ethics – something in very short supply in Congress.  Tomas didn’t stop to consider how his actions might affect him personally.  He just did the right thing.  Our Congressional representives on the other hand…

You see, the first thing many of our Congressional representatives do after winning an election is to start fundraising and campaigning for their next term in office.  That means, if there is legislation that would benefit the public versus a political contributor, they often choose to vote for the contributor’s benefit.  Or if the right thing to do is controversial, they’ll vote against it for fear their opponents will use it against them.

No one party is more guilty than the other.  This is one aspect of Congress that is truly bipartisan.

We can’t change the situation with term limits.  They’ll just be motivated to ram through as much partisan legislation as possible during their limited time in office.  We can’t change it with legislation.  They’ll just find ways around it or, worse yet, take money under the table.  But we can change the situation by making it unnecessary to raise insane amounts of money to run for office.  We can also demand better candidates. 

What we need is a Congress full of representatives like Tomas Lopez.