Category Archives: Government

Lies, Damn Lies and Teapublican Lies.

Posted on by

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?

Presidential Backstabbing.

Posted on by

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.

A Nation Without Government Is No Nation At All.

Posted on by

One of the ideological leaders of the Republican Party and the Tea Party movement, Grover Norquist, famously said, “I don’t want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it to the bathroom and drown it in a bathtub.”

Ronald Reagan once said, “…government isn’t the solution to the problem. Government is the problem.” He also said, “The most fearful words in the English language are I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”

Of course, the Teapublicans have turned these quotes into mantras that drive everything they do.

For those who are inclined to jump aboard the bandwagon of anti-government sentiment, I’d like to pose a few questions. If there is no government, who is going to defend you against terrorists and rogue nations? Who will build your roads and bridges? Check the safety of your foods? Check the qualifications of your doctors? And of your teachers?

Who will monitor the safety of your airlines? Of your drinking water and air? Who will pay the salaries of your police forces? Fight your fires? And help you recover from natural disasters?

We (you and I) created our government agencies to do what we can’t do for ourselves. The days in which we could live without efficient and effective government ended when we ceased living on farms. When we ceased raising our own food and making our own clothes. Government is now as necessary as the air we breathe and the water we drink.

Without effective government, our nation would more closely resemble Somalia, Afghanistan and Columbia than England, France, Germany, Norway or Sweden.

Teapublican Lie #26.

Posted on by

“The Housing Collapse was created by Democrats, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.”

If you listen to Teapublicans, you’d think Democratic Congressman Barney Frank was almost solely responsible for the collapse of the housing market aided by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And they’d have you believe that the collapse is further evidence of an out-of-control federal government that forced banks to loan to the poor then guaranteed loans that could never be repaid.

Yet it was legislation authored and passed by Republicans that led to the collapse.

For example, in 1986, the Reagan administration eliminated tax deductions for credit card interest. Since interest on mortgages was still deductible, that encouraged many Americans to use their homes as credit accounts through home equity loans and refinancing.

The Republican-sponsored Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 excluded capital gains taxes on home sales encouraging speculation on real estate investments.

The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 deregulated financial institutions permitting banks to risk their customers’ deposits on risky investments.

Finally, Republican deregulation contributed to mortgage brokers and financial institutions writing questionable sub-prime loans in order to collect the origination fees. The loan originators then packaged the loans into mortgage-backed securities selling them to investors. They were even able to mitigate their risks through credit default swaps that allowed them to pass much of the risk onto other institutions such as AIG.

The result of all this was to encourage Americans to view their homes as investments. Those who did not already own a home felt that they could be shut out of the housing market if they didn’t act soon.  That encouraged them to overlook the looming balloon payments of Adjustable Rate Mortgages.

By 2006, the US housing market was a house of cards ready to collapse. And it did.

As for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, their only apparent role in the collapse was through the Community Reinvestment Act that encouraged banks to reduce discrimination by writing loans to borrowers in low and moderate income areas. But, in 2006, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac insured only 24 percent of subprime loans and the Community Reinvestment Act affected only one out of the top 25 subprime lenders.

So Teapublican anger about the housing collapse is entirely misdirected. They have almost no one to blame but themselves.

Seven Common Sense Ways To Fix Our Economy.

Posted on by

1 – Re-institute the Glass-Steagall Act.

The Glass-Steagall Act was initially signed into law in 1933 to prevent a repeat of the conditions that led to the Great Depression. The law created a firewall between banks of deposit and investment banks, recognizing that a bank of deposit is entrusted with maintaining the financial security of its deposits while an investment bank, such as a stock brokerage, engages in inherently risky activities. When the same financial institution is allowed to participate in both acitivities, the deposits are placed at risk. And since the government insures deposits through the FDIC, it’s also at risk.

Unfortunately, the law was repealed in 1999 and the lax regulation of the Bush administration allowed banks to collapse as the result of the very conditions the law was designed to prevent.

2 – Return Capital Gains Taxes to Reagan-era levels.

During the Reagan administration, the maximum rate on capital gains (money derived from investments) was raised to 28 percent. But, to reward their wealthy masters, Teapublicans have cut the rate to just 15 percent and they want to eliminate capital gains taxes altogether.

Since the wealthiest 1 percent of our population makes most, if not all, its money from capital gains on investments, that means millionaires and billionaires pay an income tax rate of 15 percent or less. On the other hand, many of us who make money from salaries or as sole proprietors pay an income tax of up to 33 or 35 percent, not including payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare. See the problem?

3 – Return Income Taxes to Clinton-era levels.

Under Reagan, the maximum federal income tax rate averaged 65.70 percent. Under Clinton, the maximum income tax rate was 39.60 percent. Under Bush, the maximum income tax rate dropped to 35 percent leading to massive federal deficits.

Obviously, our current maximum tax rate has weakened our economy.  And unless we find ways to generate more revenue, we will be unable to decrease our debt or repair our infrastructure.

4 – Eliminate the cap on Social Security Withholding.

For the past several years Social Security taxes are withheld on only the first $106,800 of taxable income. By eliminating the cap, we would generate a great deal more money for Social Security, and by paying benefits to only those who actually need them, the Social Security trust fund would be solvent well into the forseeable future, perhaps permanently.

5 – Cut unnecessary duplication of city, county, state and federal offices.

If you want to build a commercial operation today, you may have to trek to as many as four offices to obtain the necessary permits. That’s because each level of government has its own unique regulations. Since environmental issues are necessarily different between Los Angeles, CA and Siren, WI, the need for different regulations is understandable. But why not streamline processes by combining similar functions in a single office? This would not only cut red tape, it would increase efficiency and cut costs.

6 – Buy local.

For the past 40 years, US manufacturers have shipped raw materials to other nations.  Then shipped the finished products back to the US.  This is not only destroying our economy, it is destroying our environment.  In fact, a case can be made that an enormous Hummer SUV is more environmentally friendly than a Prius.  That’s because the Hummer is made primarily in the US.  Eschewing foreign-made products would do wonders for American workers and everyone who breathes.

7 – Buy small.

Walmart, Target, Amazon, etc. are killing local retail stores which has led to the hollowing out of our central cities and the loss of jobs.  Yes, “big box” stores hire many employees, but they often pay less, provide fewer benefits and contribute less to the local economies.  Moreover, by emphasizing cheaper foreign-made products they continue to depress US manufacturing. 

Everyone likes lower prices and greater selection.  But who wouldn’t be willing to pay a bit more if it means our family members, friends and neighbors can keep or get a decent job? 

Justice (At Least Temporarily) For Arizona.

Posted on by

Two weeks ago, I wrote about Governor Jan Brewer and her political cronies’ removal of the independent chair of the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission. It seems the Teapublican congressional representatives were unhappy with the commission’s proposed maps which placed two Teapublican congressmen in the same district. More important, the Teapublicans were angry that the maps would create a few more competitive districts, which meant that the winner of the Teapublican primary wouldn’t be able to waltz through the general election.

So the scorpion-eating governor did the only thing she could do. She phoned her office from New York where she was peddling her self-congratulatory and largely fictional autobiography, demanding that the chair be removed for “gross misconduct.”

Of course, her obedient Teapublican minions in the State Senate voted in lockstep to impeach the chair. Then they patted themselves on their backs and crawled back into their hidey holes to plot the next attack on Democrats, independents, immigrants and anyone else who dares challenge their gun-toting, Latino-bashing, Obama-hating authority.

There was only one problem with the Teapublican power grab. The Arizona State Supreme Court agreed to hear a challenge to the impeachment.

For some reason, the Supreme Court justices did not accept the argument that Teapublican power in the state is absolute. They didn’t buy the argument that Brewer could dismiss the independent chair if she didn’t like the chair’s haircut or dress (yes, Brewer’s attorney actually made that case). Instead the justices quickly ruled that Brewer’s action was an unconstitutional over-reach.

But reasonable people in Arizona (they actually represent about two-thirds of the state’s population) shouldn’t relax yet. Brewer’s spokesmouth says the governor is reviewing the decision and contemplating the next step. Of course, the next step should be to allow the commission to do its job without interference. But that seems unlikely. This is, after all, Arizona.

The Planned Destruction Of Our Two-Party System.

Posted on by

If you wanted to destroy the opposing political party – not just defeat it – what would you do?

You’d probably look to take away its source of funding while finding ways to dramatically increase yours, such as destroying labor unions while legalizing unlimited corporate contributions as “free speech.” You’d try to marginalize and delegitimize its leader by claiming he was not born in the US. You’d try to destroy its local organizers (ACORN). And knowing that most disputes will end up in court, you’d try to stack the courts with your own appointees while blocking the other party’s.

When the other party is in power, you’d try to block any attempts to improve the economy through filibusters. You’d try to destroy confidence in any media outlets that don’t support your point of view by eliminating the Fairness Doctrine and defunding public broadcasting. You’d try to eliminate as many regulations as possible, so when you regained power you could do whatever you want. And you’d try to destroy public confidence in a government run by the other party.

When your party is in power, you’d try to change the rules to favor your candidates. You’d try to redraw the congressional and legislative districts so you could get more candidates elected. And you’d try to suppress voting blocs that tend to vote for the other party’s candidates through voter suppression efforts such as those being pushed through Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Wisconsin.

Finally, to ensure your party’s future dominance, you’d try to control our schools so you could teach your own version of history and pseudoscience by rewriting textbooks such as those published in Texas.

If you think that I’m being paranoid, that these events are coincidental, or that both parties do the same things, you simply haven’t been paying attention.

The NRA Effect.

Posted on by

Beginning in 1980, the National Rifle Association first inserted itself into politics by endorsing Ronald Reagan. Since then, the NRA has increasingly exerted its power and influence over both national and state politics. Nearly every year, the NRA writes proposed legislation then shops it around to state legislatures in hopes of finding sponsors.

Often the legislators who put their names on the bills never even read them!

An example is the Concealed Carry Law. In 1986, there were only 8 states that had legislation dictating that anyone who meets minimum requirements shall be issued a permit to carry concealed weapons. But thanks to the NRA, there are now 37 states that have “shall issue” permit laws and 4 states with no restrictions at all. Next month (November 2011), Illinois will be the only state left that does not allow concealed carry in any circumstances.

These laws were not demanded by the states’ citizens. Nor were they addressing real problems. They were written by the NRA merely to push its own narrow political agenda.

Of course, other special interest groups followed the NRA’s lead. For example, the Arizona anti-immigrant law was initially written by Kris Kobach, a professor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law. It was embraced by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) which is headquartered in Washington, DC. FAIR (or, more precisely, UNFAIR) then shopped the bill around to the states until Arizona State Senator-In-Recall, Russell Pearce agreed to sponsor it as the infamous SB1070. It has since been brought before state legislatures in Alabama, Georgia, and South Dakota.

Now Kenneth Blackwell, an Ohio citizen and Senior Fellow for Family Empowerment at the Family Research Council in Washington, DC, is pushing an anti-abortion bill for the state of Mississippi. The bill, if the voters of Mississippi pass it, will ban all abortions in the state by extending First Amendment rights to fetuses. And this isn’t the first hayride for the bill. It was previously promoted, and defeated, in Colorado.

Now, I believe US citizens should be able to create and pass legislation to solve problems in their own states as long as they meet the standards of our US Constitution. But it is one thing for a state legislature to identify issues, and quite another for special interest groups to write and promote legislative solutions in search of a problem.

It’s time for this nonsense to stop.

Are We Now Officially Living In A Police State?

Posted on by

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?