Category Archives: Politics

Are We Still Fighting The Civil War?

Posted on by

As I was reading a book about the Civil War, I was struck by the many similarities between the run-up to the war and today’s political climate. The Confederate States of America were sparsely populated and dominated by slave-owning plantation owners who resented any interference by the federal government. As one historian said, they likely would have seceded earlier, but it took 6 years for the plantation owners to convince the poor dirt farmers to fight their war for them.

On the other side, the Union was more densely populated with a recent influx of European immigrants. Many of these people had faced persecution themselves in the Old Country, and their religious beliefs were at odds with slavery. Moreover, as a result of the density of population, those in the North tended to understand that regulations and laws were necessary for everyone to thrive. Not just a few.

So the Civil War was as much the result of a conflict of philosophies as it was slavery. This conflict continued when, following the war, many former Confederate soldiers fled westward to get away from the law and order imposed by the victorious North. Unfortunately for them, they eventually ran out of real estate as settlers who believed in the law followed them west. But the philosophies of the former Confederates never entirely disappeared.

Fast forward to today. Our politics are now roughly divided into red states and blue states. The red states strongly oppose any “interference” by the federal government. And where are most of those red states? In the South and West.

And where are the blue states? In the heavily populated East, Upper Midwest, California and Northwest.

Certainly, there are pockets within the South and West where voters understand the necessary role of government. Those tend to be large population centers. But in the rural areas and smaller cities, government – especially the federal government – is viewed with disdain and suspicion.

Particularly in the West, many people identify with the cowboy mentality of old (not realizing that the term “cowboy” was originally a perjorative akin to calling someone a rustler or bandit). These people see themselves as modern day gunslingers who are standing up for their individual rights. They mostly could care less about anyone else, including the less fortunate. After all, to these people, everyone has the responsibility to pull themselves up by the bootstraps no matter the odds against it.

In the South, the story is somewhat different. Certainly resentment of the federal government continues. But now it’s wrapped in the cloak of religion. The new Christian right stems from churches that believe the Bible is literally the word of God. They selectively choose Bible verses that support their narrow views. They are anti-government (it’s the government that prevents openly Christian prayers in public schools and other public venues), anti-gay, anti-minority, anti-abortion, anti-education, anti-environmentalism, anti-evolution, anti-climate change, etc. If the government is for it, particularly the federal government, they are against it.

So here we are, politically not much further ahead than we were 150 years ago. But at least for the moment, we’re fighting with ballots. Not guns.

An Exposed Dick

Posted on by

With Richard “The Dick” Cheney set to release his tell-all book about his term as dictator-in-waiting and puppet master of the George W. Bush presidency, the early reviews are all too predictable.  Apparently Cheney praises all those who agreed with him as smart, tough and patriotic.  At the same time, he portrays those who disagreed with him as stupid, naive and weak.

Reportedly, those who fit into the latter category are former Secretaries of State, Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice. 

Of course, he also continues to support his so-called “enhanced” interrogation methods, otherwise known as torture.  The methods he ordered to be implemented on captives in our “War on Terror” included sleep deprivation, ear-splitting noise, humiliation and, of course, waterboarding.  The latter technique is officially banned as torture by the Geneva Conventions of which the US is a signator.  Indeed, in the past, the US executed enemies who were convicted of using waterboarding on US troops.

Cheney is not only unapologetic for his role as Torturer-In-Chief, he has said he would do it all over again in the same circumstances.  If he has actually put those statements in writing, I couldn’t be happier!  Those statements would be a confession of war crimes, admissable in court.  Not a court presided over by his buddies, Justices Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Scalia and Kennedy.  But the International Criminal Court which has the authority to prosecute war crimes.

Once his book is published, Cheney may never be able to travel outside the US again without fear of arrest and prosecution.  Of course, that threat is not likely to stop someone as arrogant as Cheney.  So let’s hope he decides to tour Europe.  If you believe in the rule of law, Cheney’s arrest and subsequent trial could be of real benefit to world peace.

Yee Haw! Another Texass Evangelical For President.

Posted on by

In 2000, an evangelical governor from Texas was awarded the office of President of the United States. He ran as a compassionate conservative promising to cut federal spending and to get the US out of the business of “nation-building.”

Instead, he cut taxes, eliminated financial and environmental regulations, ignored direct warnings of threats by al-Qeada to use hijacked airliners to attack the US, and started two wars costing as much as $3 trillion. His policies failed to create a single private-sector job in the US and led to the worst economic collapse since 1929. In the process, he doubled our national debt.

Now we have Rick Perry following in his footsteps. As Lieutenant Governor, he replaced Bush as Governor of Texas. Like Bush, he talks about his faith all the while promoting an agenda that favors the rich and attacks the poor. And like Bush, he brags about his “accomplishments” as governor. Foremost in his braggadocio is the so-called “Texas Miracle.” The miracle, as the story goes, is that Perry created 80 percent of the jobs in America over the past three years.

Rrrrrrright!

If you examine his claim, you find that it’s a complete and utter fraud just like the cowboy boots he wears. Certainly, Texas did create more jobs in the last year than any other state. But all of them were in the public sector;  i.e. they were government jobs, many of which resulted from Perry extending his hand to Washington in order to receive a disproportionate number of the stimulus funds. Indeed, Texas actually lost jobs in the private sector over the past three years!

And, if you look further, you see rising unemployment in Texas in addition to overcrowded homeless shelters and public schools facing billions in budget cuts. And that’s not even the scary part.

More frightening about Perry (as well as Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin) are his way-out-of-this-solar-system religious beliefs. These were put on display just days prior to his announcement that he is running for president. On August 6, he spoke at The Response, billed as a day of prayer and fasting. In fact, it was a day of lunacy with some of the nation’s most radical evangelical “religious” figures. These are people who believe the US should be a Christian theocracy; who believe in the end times and the necessity to prepare the Earth for the rapture by cleansing the Seven Mountains (arts and entertainment, business, family, government, media, religion and education) from demonic influence. These are people who believe Oprah is the precursor of the AntiChrist; who believe that gays are controlled by demons; who believe that Islam is a demonic spirit.

Just the kind of people you want in the White House and a presidential administration.

Can’t you imagine a US run by a President Perry or a President Bachmann or a President Palin? The administration would begin with a hands-on healing of gays followed by the threat of bombing every non-Christian nation unless they converted. The FCC would command that all sex (violence is okey-dokey) be banned from TV. Public broadcasting would be forced to carry Christian-only programming. All schools would be openly Christian. Every business logo would have to incorporate the symbol of a fish. And all cathedrals, synagogues, temples and mosques would be converted to New Apostolic churches.

In other words, the US would become a Christian version of Iran.

It Is Now Clear That S&P’s Downgrade Was Political.

Posted on by

Now that the Fitch rating service has confirmed the AAA rating for US Treasury bonds, it raises questions about the real motives for the downgrade by S&P. Of the three rating agencies, both Moody’s and Fitch have maintained the AAA rating. Fitch even called the outlook for US Treasury bonds positive.

Why the different outlooks?

It is possible that it merely represents a difference of opinion. It’s also possible that S&P wanted to flex its political muscle. When you read the full analysis by S&P, two statements stand out:

1 – “The political brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as America’s governance and policymaking becoming less stable, less effective, and less predictable than what we previously believed. The statutory debt ceiling and the threat of default have become political bargaining chips in the debate over fiscal policy. Despite this year’s wide-ranging debate, in our view, the differences between political parties have proven to be extraordinarily difficult to bridge, and, as we see it, the resulting agreement fell well short of the comprehensive fiscal consolidation program that some proponents had envisaged until quite recently.”

2 – “Compared with previous projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place. We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act.”

Certainly, each party has rushed to blame the other for S&P’s downgrade. However, since only one party (The Democratic Party) was publicly willing to compromise, and since the other party (The Republican Party) chose to create a crisis in order to get its way, it’s abundantly clear which party is truly to blame for the US Treasury bonds being downgraded for the first time in history. It’s also clear that the Republican position of maintaining the Bush tax cuts is fiscally irresponsible.

A Question of Compromise.

Posted on by

When Democrats and Teapublicans named their members of the so-called Super Congress, the media immediately asked, “Will Senators Patty Murray, John Kerry and Max Baucus be willing to compromise with their Teapublican counterparts? What about Representatives James Clyburn, Xavier Becerra and Chris Van Hollen?”

Say what?

During the last three and a half years, Democrats have amply demonstrated a willingness to compromise.  During the negotiations for health reform, they caved on the most important component – the public option. Last Fall, they gave in to Teapublicans by extending the Bush-era tax cuts despite the growing deficit. And in the recent negotiations to raise the debt ceiling, Democrats gave up on increased revenue from closing tax loopholes and raising taxes on the wealthy. 

What compomises have Teapublicans been willing to make?

One can’t help but wonder why the media failed to ask if the Teapublican representatives on the Super Congress committee will be willing to compromise. After all, Mitch McConnell said he would not appoint anyone to the committee who would vote for increased tax revenue. Could it be that the so-called “mainstream, liberal-biased” media are now biased toward Teapublicans?

The Democrats can’t afford to negotiate away their principles again. If they do, Democratic support for the administration and Congress will likely collapse. Of course, that’s what Teapublicans are counting on.

The “I’ve Got Mine, You Don’t Deserve Yours” Crowd.

Posted on by

According to a recent MSNBC.com article by Brian Alexander, lower class people are more likely to have empathy and compassion while the rich are more likely to think of themselves.  

The article confirmed my own observations. 

As an advertising executive, I’ve often listened to wealthy and powerful clients talk about how their success is the result of their own hard work, determination and risk-taking. They rarely give credit to the many other factors that have played a role in their success. 

They tend to forget that their educations were subsidized by local, state and federal governments. They forget the scholarships and low interest government loans that helped them pay for college. They forget about the Small Business Administration loans that provided the seed money for their companies.  They forget about the Tax Increment Financing that resulted in a no-interest, no-property tax loan for their company headquarters.  They forget about the contributions of their employees and suppliers. And they tend to forget about the contributions of their family, teachers, coaches and mentors who helped shape their lives.

One of my former clients, who received more than $50 million/year in compensation, once demanded that his managers fire 10 percent of their workforce after a year of record profits and then hire new replacements.  His reasoning?  He wanted to make certain that his employees would not “rest on their laurels” so he could make even more money the next year.

Fortunately, he was an exception. But an uncomfortable number of people are similarly driven. And because they are so firm in their belief that they “made it on their own,” they are often unwilling to help others reach for success.

It is this mindset that is at the very heart of the Tea Party movement. Their anti-tax, anti-deficit, anti-government, anti-Obama rants are driven by a philosophy best expressed by a quote from their hero, Ayn Rand, “It is the morality of altruism that men have to reject.”

That philosophy clearly explains their opposition to social safety nets such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. It explains their opposition to the extension of unemployment benefits and any government spending to stimulate our moribund economy.  It explains why are they so opposed to the very government institutions that made their success possible.

But according to the MSNBC.com article, “Rich people may not be selfish as much as willfully clueless.  Research at Duke and Harvard universities showed that regardless of political affiliation or income, Americans tended to think wealth distribution ought to be more equal. The problem? Rich people wrongly believed it already was.”

Downgraded Expectations

Posted on by

I’m not just referring to the lowered credit rating for US Treasury notes. If Teapublicans are allowed to continue the same political obstructionism they’ve displayed in the first 2-1/2 years of the Obama administration, we should all become accustomed to expecting less. Less jobs. Less retirement benefits. Less access to health care. Less government services. Less civility in public discourse. And less honesty.

Just consider: Despite being elected by an overwhelming majority of the voting public, President Obama has, thus far, been stonewalled by Teapublicans who, the day after the election, stated that their main goal is to make Obama a one-term president. Many on the right immediately called for Obama to fail despite the obvious implication that that would mean the US would also fail.

No previous president has been subjected to such organized obstruction and nonsense. Teapublicans have questioned his legitimacy by saying he was born in Kenya. They have called him a socialist, a communist, a facist and a Nazi. And they have blamed him for the economic disaster created by his predecessor.

In Congress, Teapublicans have filibustered a record number of legislative initiatives. They have blocked a record number of cabinet and judicial nominations. They have blocked nearly every attempt to stimulate the economy and create jobs. And they created a debt ceiling “crisis” when their own tax cuts led to massive increases in the national debt.

It’s all part of their “starve the beast” philosophy of less government. So what has it gotten us? An economy that is still struggling more than three years after their less-government-no-regulation policies led to the worst economic crash since the Great Depression. And now that US Treasury bonds have been downgraded as a result of their brinksmanship, the economy is once again teetering on the edge of disaster.

Given that S&P clearly stated its reason for downgrading our bond rating is our dysfunctional Congress, one might assume that Teapublicans will come to their collective senses and begin to compromise in order to create jobs, generate more revenue and cut our deficit.

That is the lesson sane people might take away from S&P’s message. But, that’s not who we’re dealing with.  Instead, we have to rely on John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, Michelle Bachmann and Eric Cantor correctly reading their tea leaves.

World’s Greatest Nation? Really?

Posted on by

Although many Americans are fond of calling the US the greatest nation on Earth, that hasn’t been true for many years. Certainly we have the world’s most powerful military, but that’s no criteria for greatness. Neither is the fact that we are still the world’s richest nation, despite the downgrade in our credit rating by Standard & Poors.

But greatest?

Does a great nation tolerate an ever-widening gap between billionaires and the working poor? Does a great nation leave tens of millions of its citizens without access to health care? Does a great nation allow millions of its children to be homeless? Does a great nation allow its education system to become third-rate? Does a great nation allow its infrastructure to decay and collapse merely to give another tax cut to large corporations and the wealthy?

Does a great nation use its financial and military power to prop up brutal dictatorships around the world? Does a great nation bankrupt the small farmers of neighboring countries by subsidizing corporate farms then demonize those farmers when they cross the border looking for jobs? Does a great nation demean those who labor to build things with their hands, to put out fires, or to teach its youth? Does a great nation begrudge a comfortable retirement to its elderly? Does a great nation allow large corporations and the wealthy to elect its politicians?

How can a nation be called great when it rewards greed and corruption? When its judicial system rules that corporations have rights superior to those of its citizens? When its financial institutions are allowed to grow so large they are immune to failure from their own mistakes? When its corporate lawyers are tasked with seeking out financial and legal loopholes that allow their clients to game the system? When its politicians are more concerned with scoring political points than the welfare of its voters? When its citizens are more interested in the antics of its celebrities than those of its government? When it allows its previous leader to run up a huge debt, and then blames the leader who inherited it?

We didn’t need Standard & Poors to tell us that our nation is on the verge of bankruptcy. When it comes to fairness, ideas and ethics, the US has been on the verge of bankruptcy for many years.

If Teapublicans Have Such Great Ideas, Why Do They Lie So Much?

Posted on by

Why do they generate and circulate a seemingly endless number of blatantly false and misleading chain emails that demean our President?
Why do they try to shout down everyone with whom they disagree?
Why do they parrot talking points instead of rationally debating issues?
Why do they protect the obscenely wealthy and attack the poor?
Why do they complain about immigration then hire illegal immigrants to do their landscaping or repair their roofs?
Why do they preach small government then pass laws giving government power to prevent gay marriages and lawful abortions?
Why do they fight to ban abortions while, at the same time, fighting against sex education and the contraceptive practices that would help avoid them?
Why do they revere police and firefighters for responding to 9/11 then try to take away their right to collective bargaining and health care?
Why do they praise those in the military and ignore veterans in need of help?
Why do they revere President Bush for adding $7 trillion to our national debt and crashing our economy then attack President Obama for adding $1.4 trillion in trying to fix it?
Why do they complain about the excesses of Wall Street bankers while trying to block laws that will regulate them?
Why do they slash budgets for education while complaining that the US is falling behind other nations?
Why do they complain about unemployment as they cut federal budgets to force even more layoffs?
Why do they complain about government health care while telling the government to keep its hands off their Medicare?
Why do they complain about passing health care reform after a 10-month debate then pass a bill to kill entitlements with virtually no debate.
Why do they talk about helping small businesses then undercut them with policies that only benefit large corporations?
Why do they refuse to eliminate tax loopholes for corporations that claim an offshore P.O. Box as their corporate headquarters?
Why do they subsidize big oil companies and refuse to subsidize renewable alternatives?
Why do they call themselves conservatives when they’re against conservation of our environment?
Why do they demand compromise then refuse to consider alternate ideas?

The Political Legacy Of The “Christian” Right.

Posted on by

Sometime around 1979, Jerry Falwell helped create the “Moral” Majority.  Despite the separation clause in the US Constitution, the group’s goal was to push a Christian agenda in US politics.  Although the organization was dissolved in the late 1980s, it was followed by Pat Robertson’s and Ralph E. Reed, Jr’s Christian Coalition in 1988.  

Capitalizing on the fight against abortion, the group’s political clout reached its zenith in the late 1990s during the Clinton administration and during George W. Bush’s successful campaign for president.  In Bush, the group had a president who gladly did its bidding.  Bush repaid the group with his federal funding of “faith-based” organizations and his denial of federal funding for contraception and abortion.

Since Bush left office the group has taken a backseat to Tea Party Republicans.  But it has left a substantial legacy which, in many ways, has become even more entrenched today. 

You can see that legacy in the religious zeal with which the Republican faithful have purged their ranks of political moderates, aka RINOs (Republicans In Name Only).  In this religious-based mentality, there is no place for compromise.  It’s a mentality in which everything is as black and white as good and evil.

Ironically, the “Christian” right perverts the very tenets of Christianity – those of understanding, forgiveness and help for the poor.  Instead, the leaders of the group have pushed an agenda of intolerance, hatred and even war.  I’ve heard these leaders pray for the death of Supreme Court Justices so Bush could annoint, I mean appoint, another right-wing conservative to the Court.  I’ve heard these leaders call for political assassinations of those with whom they disagree.  And I’ve heard these leaders justify wars against people of other faiths.

Unfortunately, these leaders were given a forum for their ideas through syndicated “Christian” radio.  Their zeal and anger have been parroted and amplified by Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and most every host on Fox News Channel.  Now the “faithful” are demanding a crusade against government and those they consider non-believers such as Muslims, the poor, the elderly, immigrants, unions, teachers, firefighters and, of course, Democrats.