Category Archives: President Obama

What kind of country do Republicans envision?

Posted on by

Given the Republican response to President Obama’s initiatives, one has to wonder exactly what the Republican vision for our nation actually is.  To try to determine that, let’s look at recent events.  If Republicans had prevailed on their opposition to the TARP bailouts of Wall Street banks, most economists believe that the entire world economy would have collapsed and we would be in the midst of a 2nd Great Depression.  Republicans argued against bailouts to General Motors and Chrysler which likely would have forced both into bankruptcy putting up to 10 million workers on unemployment.  Republicans fought the stimulus plan which, by even the most conservative estimates, has saved or created up to 2 million jobs.  And they have continued to whine about the growing deficits under Obama while lionizing Reagan for tripling our national debt.

The Republican alternative to Obama’s attempts to save our economy?  Tax cuts for the wealthy despite the fact that most economists believe such cuts would do nothing to alleviate our situation.  In fact, many feel that the tax cuts could make things worse!

Republicans have fought any form of banking regulation.  They have voted to keep the status quo on an unsustainable health care system that results in 33,000 deaths each year for lack of access.  They have voted against increasing benefits for military veterans.  Republicans refuse to allow the federal government to negotiate lower prices for pharmaceuticals as Canada and many other nations have done.  They are opposed to spending money to encourage the development of reasonable alternatives to fossil fuels.  They dismiss the international scientific community’s warnings of global climate change.  They have long stated their disdain for “entitlements” such as Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.  They are vehemently opposed to labor unions.  They are opposed to social services for the poor, saying that they should be the responsibility of faith-based organizations.  Republican-appointed Supreme Court justices voted to corrupt our election process by permitting corporations (even those based overseas) to spend unlimited amounts of money in support of candidates who favor their positions. 

Under the Bush/Cheney regime, Republicans started two wars with no clear plan on how to win them, and no plan to pay for them.  (Indeed, they intentionally obscured the actual cost of the wars – in terms of dollars and lives.)  And they awarded billions to Halliburton and other corporations through no-bid contracts. 

The Democratic Congress has shown a decided lack of unity and will.  But based on the Republican record, why would anyone want to return the Republican Party to power?  Or their even less-pleasant brethren – the members of the Tea Party?

The Ghosts of George W. Bush and Richard (The Dick) Cheney.

Posted on by

On January 20, 2009, you probably thought the Bush/Cheney administration had come to an ignominious end.  You were wrong.  The problems generated by these goons still haunt us.  The war in Iraq may be winding down (although we can’t be certain), but the war in Afghanistan is growing.  The oil companies and Big Pharma are still holding a gun to our collective heads.  The Wall Street tycoons are still gambling with our money and paying themselves six to eight figure bonuses.  The corporations and utilities are still spewing poisons into our atmosphere.  The gun lobby is still rewriting laws to permit more weaponry.  Health insurance companies are still hauling in record profits while denying care to millions. 

Don’t blame Obama.  These issues all began or at least ballooned under Bush/Cheney and it will take years to change them. 

But these issues are the least of our problems.  Seriously!  The most problematic legacy of the Bush years is a Supreme Court dominated by conservatives who liberally support big corporations while denying rights for individuals.

And now that the Roberts Court has over-reached by over-turning 103 years of established law to allow unlimited funding for candidates by large corporations, what Senators or Congressional representatives will dare to vote against corporate interests when those corporations can spend millions, maybe billions, to defeat them in the next election?  What Gubernatorial or Legislative candidate will be able to raise enough money to compete with a corporate-sponsored foe?  The majority opinion of the Court says it ruled to erase limits on free speech.  The effect will be very much the opposite. 

Campaign donations and lobbying are paying off for health care.

Posted on by

Health care related businesses have long been the biggest spenders in politics.  The AMA, American Hospital Association, Pharma, and insurance companies have donated millions to Congressional, Senatorial and Presidential campaigns.  They have a massive collection of lobbyists.  And it’s working.

Purdue Pharma, Aetna and The Hartford have all generously contributed to Joe Lieberman’s election campaigns.  And when it came time to vote on health care reform, Joe hijacked the Senate bill, threatening to join a Republican filibuster unless the public option was removed.  The biggest contributors to Senator Ben Nelson’s campaigns have included insurance and health care professionals, and now he wants to stop the bill over abortion language.  Senator Max Baucus who presided over the gang of 6 that removed some of the strongest elements of the House bill is backed by insurance, health professionals and pharmaceuticals.  The list goes on…and on. 

I admire the efforts by President Obama and the dozens of Democratic Senators and Congressional Representatives who have fought so hard to reform health care.  It’s desperately needed.  But with Republicans determined to block any health care reform and the health care industry flexing the muscle gained by contributing millions to elected officials, it’s unlikely that any substantive health care reform will ever reach the President’s desk. 

Even if it does, it’s likely to benefit the health care industry more than our citizens. 

Democrats still need to grow a pair.

Posted on by

Since Bill Clinton left office, the Democratic Party has been searching for a large dose of testosterone.   When Barack Obama won the Democratic nomination, it seemed that the party had finally found someone who had the vision, the intelligence and the strength to stand up to an opposing party that is united in its support of corporations and the wealthy. 

That may be true, but it’s becoming increasingly difficult to tell.

Despite a large majority in the House and a 60-member caucus in the Senate, the Democrats once again seem weak and incapable of governing.  The health care reform bill is exhibit A.  In its current form, the Senate bill will mandate that everyone purchase insurance from private corporations more interested in increasing their profits than controlling costs and provide health care coverage for their customers. 

It’s time for President Obama and Congressional Democrats to drop their futile attempts at bipartisanship and pull together.  If they don’t, Sarah Palin and the Tea Party may have a better chance of reaching majority status in the future than Democrats. 

According to a new NBC-Wall Street Journal poll, they’re currently more popular.

How tea-baggers can eliminate the national debt.

Posted on by

Since President Obama’s inauguration, the so-called tea-baggers have demonstrated, yelled at and threatened the administration. They claim the President is not a citizen. They believe he is trying to implement a socialist, or even communist, agenda. And they seem most angry over increases in the national debt. Never mind that the increases are the result of the previous administration’s policies. Never mind that much of the money allocated through TARP funds has been repaid. Never mind that GM seems on the road to recovery. And ignore the fact that, according to the CBO, the stimulus has saved or created 1.6 million jobs.

However, I think we can channel all that anger and energy to help pay off the national debt. Since the tea-baggers have driven up sales of guns and ammo following Obama’s election, they’re certainly well-enough armed to defend our shores. That would permit us to eliminate most of our national defense budget.

Just think, without a large military force, the tea-baggers would no longer have to fear that our government will take away their freedoms. Of course, we could keep a small professional military to operate, maintain and defend our enormous arsenal of nuclear tipped missiles. That would ensure that no foreign government would attack us. We’d bring home our troops from Afghanistan, Iraq, Germany, Japan and South Korea. Without an enormous military and all of its ships, planes, tanks and troop carriers, we would have less need for oil, so we would no longer need to project American power around the globe. And since most of our large, multi-national corporations have already exported most of our jobs, we should feel no obligation to protect corporate interests on foreign soil. Besides, those companies can afford to hire their own protection such as the likes of Blackwater, aka Xe.

What’s not to like? No more war. No more nation-building (other than on our own soil). No more national debt. All made possible by putting the tea-baggers’ guns and anger to better use.

The no-it-all party.

Posted on by

As Republicans continue to attack President Obama over the lousy economy they, themselves, created, it becomes painfully obvious that they have no compassion, no ideas, no shame and no clue.  They keep serving up the same failed theories and rhetoric that got us into this mess. 

In their minds, the economy would recover if only the Democrats would provide more tax cuts for the wealthy.  At the same time, Republicans are attempting to stonewall any attempts at regulating Wall Street or reforming the runaway health insurance industry.  In their view, the “free” market and deregulation are cure-alls for anything that ails our economy.

But before anyone wants to sign onto their Reagan-inspired trickle-down economic theories, let’s look at what this kind of thinking has brought us over the last 30 years of Republican leadership:

1 – More than 14 million Americans are currently unemployed, and Federal Reserve Chairmen Ben Bernanke blames the continuing high level of unemployment on the too-big-to-fail banks for failing to make loans to small businesses, the engine that drives our economy. 

2 – 49 million Americans, including 17 million children, currently lack adequate, consistent access to food. 

3 – The VA estimates that 131,000 veterans are homeless on any given night and 18 veterans commit suicide every single day. 

4 – Nearly 47 million Americans lack health insurance.  Of those, nearly 45,000, including 2,266 veterans, die each year for lack of access to health care. 

5 – In what used to be a sight seen only in third world nations, thousands of American citizens have stood in line for free health care because they lack insurance.  More than 8,000 stood in line to receive health care in Los Angeles alone.  Many were turned away.  1,000 recently stood in line for free health care in New Orleans and there are similar free clinics scheduled in Little Rock, Kansas City and other U.S. cities.

These are not the kind of problems that will be solved by more tax cuts for the wealthy or further deregulation of our greedy, ship-the-jobs-off-shore industries.  They require substantial commitments of tax dollars, along with fresh ideas and political will, neither of which are currently available from the Republican Party.

The Bush Legacy: America in Decline

Posted on by

A few weeks ago, economists Martin Wolf and Robert Shiller appeared on Fareed Zakaria’s GPS on CNN.  They said, “It is now clear that the Obama team has helped avert a complete meltdown of our financial markets.  But they warned that one of the greatest dangers facing our nation is the growing economic disparity between the rich and the poor.”  They went on to say, “This could create a country in which not even those with a great deal of money will want to live.”

There are other troubling effects of Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy, deregulation and the Republican Party’s stubborn adherence to trickle-down economics. 

Although he draws no conclusions relative to party politics, Rick Newman talks about warning signs of American decline in a story published by U.S. News & World Report.  In the story he states, “…real household income in America has flat-lined, which means many middle-class families are barely keeping up with inflation. The exploding federal deficit hamstrings the government’s ability to help. Healthcare is too expensive, America’s manufacturing base is eroding, and two open-ended foreign wars are draining the national treasury.”

Newman goes on to point out that the annual “prosperity index“ published by Legatum Institute, a London-based research firm, now ranks the U.S. as the ninth most prosperous country in the world.  The same study ranks the United States 27th for the health of its citizens, a statistic that is all the more disturbing given the fact that we spend far more on healthcare per person than any other nation.

According to Newman’s article, the U.S. poverty rate of 17 percent ranks third worst among advanced nations above only Turkey and Mexico.  And since our future depends on the education of our youth, there is more disturbing news.  American 15-year-olds score below average among advanced nations on math and science.

There is one glimmer of positive news:  Newman points out that, according to a GfK Roper survey of how nations are viewed by others, “America rocketed from No. 7 in 2008 to No. 1 in 2009, largely because the world cheered the election of Barack Obama as U.S. president.”

Psalm 109:8 – a call for Christian jihadists.

Posted on by

It appears that demonstrating with signs showing President Obama with a Hitleresque moustache and calling him a Nazi, a Socialist, and a Communist are not enough.  Indeed, for some, packing guns at Presidential speeches hasn’t sufficiently delivered a strong enough message.  Now we have opportunistic religious conservatives selling t-shirts, bumper stickers, even teddy bears with the slogan “Pray for Obama, Psalm 109:8.”

That seems innocent enough – until you read the verse from the Bible.  Psalm 109:08 says “May his days be few; may another take his place of leadership.”  Okay, you say, but isn’t that the conservatives’ way of saying that they hope Obama isn’t re-elected?  You might make a case for that, until you read the verse that follows:  Psalm 109:09 says “May his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow.”  In other words, the t-shirts are more likely a coded message calling for the assassination of our president. 

That should surprise no one.  From the time Obama began his campaign for President, there has been an attempt by a percentage of our population to dismiss, demean, and demonize him beginning with questions about his place of birth. 

These tactics aren’t new.  For centuries, political movements have used adversity to further their interests and create irrational fear.  They attempt to assign blame for our problems – in this case, the recession and burgeoning national debt.  By fomenting distrust and anger toward those accused of being responsible, these political movements hope to make themselves look good.  So the religious right has portrayed Obama as a Kenyan, Muslim, Socialist radical bent on bankrupting our nation, destroying our Constitution and our way of life.  In their view, he’s “an elitist, an internationalist and, most importantly, not one of us.”

So, since the inauguration, there have been angry demonstrations, outrageous attacks by radio and TV hosts, dozens of vicious chain emails containing fraudulent accusations, large increases in gun and ammunition sales, and (according to the Secret Service) a 400 percent increase in death threats to our President. 

Given the items now being offered by the wingnut otherwise known as “Crusader Patriot”, it would seem that the religious right is just getting started. 

“An electronic Pearl Harbor”

Posted on by

Last Sunday, a report by Steve Kroft on 60 Minutes discussed the threat of cyber terrorism.

At the center of his report, Kroft interviewed Jim Lewis who directs the Center for Strategic and International Studies. According to Lewis, the United States has already experienced “an electronic Pearl Harbor.” Lewis continued, “Some unknown foreign power, and honestly, we don’t know who it is, broke into the Department of Defense, to the Department of State, the Department of Commerce, probably the Department of Energy, probably NASA. They broke into all of the high-tech agencies, all of the military agencies, and downloaded terabytes of information. Someone was able to get past the firewall and encryption devices of one of the most sensitive U.S. military computer systems and stay inside for several days,” he stated. The system he referred to is the CENTCOM network, which is our military’s control center for fighting wars. Lewis said that the hackers sat inside the network, tracking information and documents “like they were part of military command.” According to Lewis, this is the “most significant” breach of security ever “acknowledged by the Pentagon.”

Proof that the Obama administration is weak militarily and soft on terrorism? No, wait!

Obama’s Third War

Posted on by

Recently, the Obama administration declared a new war – a war on Fox News.  Although I don’t entirely agree with the Obama administration’s action, I certainly understand it.  News organizations have a responsibility to present facts in an unbiased manner and to clearly distinguish opinion from news.  Fox News does neither.

Indeed, the network itself claims that only a few hours a day are news.  It refers to the rest of its programming as “conversations.”  During these “conversations,” Fox News allows Hannity, Beck, O’Reilly, et al and their guests to make unsubstantiated claims or wild allegations against the administration and other Democrats.  Then it “reports” those claims and allegations during its “newscasts” and on its “news” crawls.  The network has even sponsored and promoted one-sided political events such as “tea parties” and “9-12” demonstrations.  These are not the actions of a legitimate news organization.

Moreover, compared to assaults on the press by some of its predecessors, the administration’s response to Fox News is actually quite mild.  For example, President George W. Bush not only refused access to reporters and organizations deemed antagonistic to his agenda, the Bush administration produced propaganda disguised as “news” stories and provided them to local TV and radio stations.  It paid journalists to present White House talking points.  It even tried to limit funding for public radio and TV unless their reporting became friendlier to the Bush White House.

Unlike some of the Bush administration’s actions, the snub of Fox News does not raise any constitutional issues.  It is not censorship.  The Obama administration is not telling Fox News what it can say or report.  The administration simply limited press invitations to representatives of actual news organizations.   Although it may be unwise to antagonize any media outlet, it is not unconstitutional.