Do you really know why?

I've been amazed watching and listening to folks who come out against President Obama and his policies.  These are folks that are so dead-set in what they believe that they swear to high heaven that he's evil incarnate.  These folks focus on the man, not the policy.  They focus on other things, not what he has done and what he has been doing.  That's why I opine that these folks really don't know why they are against the President except they are told to be against him.

The birther incident: The allegation that the President was born in another country and the tremendous (and quite elaborate) conspiracy cover-up that happened to right the record ... has to be the most insane waste of time and effort ever created by man.  Folks - we're talking about official records.  Official records that are nearly impossible to forge without covering up about a thousand steps in the process.  Obama and Hawaii officials released his birth certificate ... no that wasn't enough.  The birthers all jumped up and down pounding tables like some errant child.  Okay - Obama and Hawaii officials released the long form ... but the birthers still finding resolve within their extremely baseless case ... started saying the birth certificate was fake ... yada yada yada ....

FACT: The state of Hawaii has certified that the birth certificate they have in their possession is the true and accurate copy of the President's birth certificate.  Our United States are founded on the common principles and acceptance of said records when someone moves from one state to another.  If this weren't the case, every state would have folks that couldn't leave -- because if their records couldn't be authenticated then they wouldn't be allowed to relocate.  States must observe the official nature of the records contained within - or else run the risk of watching the system fall completely apart.

Obama wants to take away my health care:  The scare tactics of the right went unverified.  Because there is no evidence that Obama wanted to take anyone's health care away from them.  If anything - he wants to make it easier for folks to get health care and to make it more affordable for EVERYONE.  It's a very simple process ... one that tries to work with the health insurance lobby ... but the basic reality is that health care costs have soared in the last decade while coverage has shrunk.  Someone is benefiting from this ... and the media decides to ignore the 800lb gorilla in the room.  Republicans decry that Obama is trying to make the United States into a socialist country ... and these folks have absolutely no idea what they're talking about.

FACT: The Affordable Care Act ensures that folks can get help - who need help.  Yes it's going to cost ... but that's nothing new since we're already dolling out billions (if not more) in premiums every year as a nation.  At least under ACA the money  is going where it's supposed to go in the first place ... between patient and doctor.  If folks can't wrap their mind around why the health insurance lobby wants to stop Obama ... and can recognize the the lobby has a vested interest ... then these folks shouldn't be allowed to vote.  Seriously - if you're blinded at the lights and mirrors the lobbyists are shining on you - you have no business pulling a lever in November.  There is no defense against that.

Quit blaming Bush - he's had three years to fix this...:  When folks say things like this - I just shake my head because they absolutely acknowledge that there was a problem to begin with.  The country was already heading downhill at the time of election.  The housing market popped, markets scrammed and oil prices began their climb.  Folks were laid off, companies relocated overseas, and businesses were still receiving hand over fist in subsidies and other tax breaks.  Any plan Obama or McCain had leading into the 2008 election became null and void.  There - I said it.

FACT: The simple reality is Obama inherited something very ugly from his predecessor.  He did stave off a larger, deeper recession as many experts believe.  Obama warned all of us that this was going to take a long while - and it has.  No one likes the fact that the recession hit and hit all of us ... but markets have continued to rebound, unemployment hasn't continued it's downward slope and the GDP is coming back.  Recessions take awhile to correct ... and while the Republicans are seizing the opportunity to make this into a political issue - they themselves are partly to blame.

It's all Obama's fault:  This has to be the largest falsehood put out in the PAC commercials and media.  They don't report on the numerous times Obama shunned his party to reach across the aisle to the Republicans who did nothing but slap it away.  The Republicans had their own plan - wrench everything up and just wait ... folks won't remember that they stalled on key segments of Obama's plan so that they could then blame him for "failing America."

FACT: When most of the Republican Governors that were awarded stimulus money that would've gone to pay for jobs in their state ... they denied it.  When the Republicans could've latched onto the single largest health care reform act in this country's history - they balked, derided and showed nothing but discontempt for something that could HELP millions of Americans ... but gosh - not at the expense of the health insurance lobby.  Capitalism trumps morality ... and when the Republicans want to rail Obama for failing this country - they shouldn't look too far away from the mirror.

Bottom line: I challenge folks to come out what exactly they are against when it comes to this President.  He has maintained the same tax breaks on the upper 1% which hardly any of us know ... and he wants to do more for middle and lower America who have been hit really hard thanks to the Bush legacy.  Make your list and allow me to ask you questions regarding it.  Because you may find that you have been sucked into protoplasm of the Republican message machine which controls a heavily flawed bias.  Journalism as we once knew it - is dead ... and has been dead.  Both sides - Democrat and Republican latch on to their friendly reporters who then pen glowing recommendations of their fabled leader.  It's a problem when there's no credibility in the press anymore ... and when the supremes awarded unlimited power to corporations to channel money in to campaigns then tilted balance of the political system made it impossible for the common man to have his voice heard ... much less his views tainted, slanted and biased.

The Ryan Card....

So Romney picks Ryan ... as much as it is a concidence, their initials R&R seem to match how America would be if the Republicans win in November: rail roaded...

What stands out about the Ryan pick is that it does nothing to bring independents or Democrats to the Republican side of the ballot come November. In fact, Obama has been handed Florida ... in one fell swoop.

Appealing to the Tea Party fan base is one thing, but extending beyond your core beliefs to dabble into the extremes of your party isn't a winning strategy either.

Let's face it.

Mitt has had many problems of late ... as he continues to lead a gaffe-filled campaign into the "home stretch." But let's give an analysis of how his campaign is shaping up:

- His foreign policy is nothing short of a disaster. Gaffes in Britain, Israel and our allies in Europe only make him look weaker when it comes to how he'll handle world affairs.

- His own skeletons he's very very protective of. His tax returns continue to hobble him - even though he probably could release them and watch the dust fade away ... he has guarded them - and has increased their importance by not releasing them. Now there's more questions as to "what's he hiding" ... that may or may not amount to anything ... but it's very telling.

- He can't try to invoke privilege when it comes to his finances since he's using his business practices as his credentials for running the country. It doesn't work on a one way street Mitt ....

- The war on women, I feel is going to have a profound amount of pain this election for the Republicans. They have done a lot to alienate and invade on women's rights - from abortion and health to equal pay (which Republicans fought so strongly on.)

- Even though Mitt may have his heritage somewhere in his Hispanic lineage, he has no plan strong enough to withstand the smell test when it comes to immigration reform.

- Yes Ryan puts some more credibility in the economy and government spending ... but this doesn't poll well with independents and democrats.

So as far as I can tell - a Ryan pick is a wasted one. He should've picked someone more moderate to bring in independents and snag a few democrats along the way. That pick would've been Ron Paul ... not Paul Ryan. Which is fine by me because this is good news for Obama and the Democrats. The more red-meat out there, the more Obama can lean into the middle ground and draw in the center while holding onto his base.

The real problem I can see ... is how well Biden is going to do against Ryan in the debates... If there's a soft spot in the Dem ticket ... it would be the bottom half.

Jesus Loves Chicken....

I just don't buy into the whole: "Jesus would want me to hate people, so I'm ordering a chicken sandwich in show of my support..."

The Bartender - Taxation .... fraud

(seen this before - but good for laughs another time around...)

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100…

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this…

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.

The fifth would pay $1.

The sixth would pay $3.

The seventh would pay $7..

The eighth would pay $12.

The ninth would pay $18.

The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that’s what they decided to do..

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. “Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20″. Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).

The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).

The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).

The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).

The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).

The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.

“I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving,” declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,”but he got $10!”

“Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!”

“That’s true!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!”

“Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison, “we didn’t get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!”

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier. It's not so much people mind helping out, but when you have a government that spends $1 Trillion more than it takes in, it is not a revenue problem, it is a spending problem. Get that in check and I am with you.

But in that analogy - it's the 10th man that keeps promising to pay the bartender - but never does. He keeps benefiting from the beer he drinks, but the comes to pay up the 10th man is full of excuses ... "the Swiss have my money," "I have stockholders to answer to," "the big spill wasn't really my fault, but I'll give you a $20 for it and we can call it good", "I really don't think it's fair that I should be limited to three yachts this year because last year I could buy four," "I'm G.E. and have lost so much money - I shouldn't have to pay my bar bill."

According to your analogy every time the bartender comes with the bill - the 10th man dashes out the door because he feels like he's paid his fair share ... even though his dad, his grand dad and great grand dad all paid the bartender promptly each and every time. It's a legacy every generation has embraced to make the tavern a better place for the next generation.

Problem is - the tavern has been subject to the promises of a lot of people who are in the same class like the 10th man. Each time the bartender threatens to raise the price of their drinks - they keep threatening to leave and go to the Swiss bar or the Cayman Island bar. So the bartender keeps accruing debt so that at least he has some people coming in. Because he knows the 10th man has money - he offers incentives (even though he can't afford them) "free meals," "half-priced shots," "free ride on the buckin' bronco" ... but like where we are today - eventually no one will lend the bartender any more money because he's tapped out. Finished. Dried up.

All of the 10th men out there - have ALREADY taken their money, their capital and their jobs out of the country. We've been hemorrhaging for decades now ... because the 99% of us believed that if you give the 10th men their tax breaks, incentives, tax subsidies - the jobs will come.

They haven't.

I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but the 35% tax rate on the rich is the LOWEST rate since we were in high school. When we were born - 1969/70's ... the tax rate was 70%. When there isn't enough revenue - we borrow - and that's why we have the deficit that SOARED in the 80's and where we are today. It's the rate Republicans are fighting for today.

Ever since Reagan did his little trickle-down economic trick ... tax revenue dropped, the country had to borrow and the deficit soared. Companies did invest in American jobs because tariffs and other trade embargoes were in place to ensure that the jobs stayed home. When the Great Big Outsourcing began - the jobs left - and companies were STILL rewarded with lower tax rates.

If history teaches us anything - we should be investing at home first. We already have a man running for the Presidency that has embraced the ideal of taking your money elsewhere ... and I hate to disagree with you but that sends the wrong message to the country.

The fact we can have this discussion, the fact you can choose your career, own a car, own a home, freely leave the country on vacation, move, buy 10 flat screen TV's along with the sledgehammer to smash them up, send your children to wherever you want ... all makes it about freedom ... not socialism.

But I do agree with you on something though. A beer summit would do wonders to resolve this ... the more trashed everyone is - the less painful it feels like some days.

Cheers!

Beyond ... dumb

Someone posted the uneducated meme about how Florida, Kentucky and Missouri are requiring welfare recipients to undergo required testing.  It doesn't work ... it creates more government and it even costs these states MORE than it saves.

But then some idiot posts that it doesn't matter because the Supreme Court and the 9th Court will rule it unconstitutional.  The stupid comment that came after?


"They no longer have our backs."

Really?

It's always astounding to confront folks like this because they lack the basic reality of civics and how our nation was founded.  The Constitution is a revered document that seeks protect everyone ... and yet it's idiots like this that which look at our frame work in terms of "victory" ... like someone might think of a gang.

...and it's these same folks that have the audacity to criticize at how the Democrats are ruining civilization....

Credibility - zero

Healthcare -1, GOP corporate protectionism - 0

Very happy to see the Supremes do the right thing on "Obamascare."

The Republican party should be ashamed of themselves and drop their moralistic dogma ... if they think it's more humane to deny health coverage to those who can't afford it ... just to protect the profit of those who provide coverage.

Republicans had a chance to meet in the middle and strike a deal ... but they don't want Obama's legacy to be permanently rooted in what was the right thing ... when their own party has roots in providing health care for all.....

Anger & the GOP

Folks that support the Republicans heading into the 2012 elections really need to ask themselves if they support the hate-filled, very un-Christian-like agendas they're rolling out.

If you identify as being in support of the GOP and their failed policies - then turn in your cross to your pastor and tell them that you've been living in sin ... lying ... and being hypocritical.  Renounce your faith in God - who loves all of his children - regardless.  If you condone the behavior and antics of giving more money to the rich - then you do not support the principles that Jesus has tried to teach you.

The Republican party caters to the bible out of convenience for their causes - not because they subscribe to the true meanings contained therein.  They practice a form of heresy ... and should be held accountable for their outlooks.

The Pot Problem

Marijuana is a drug.

...so is ibuprofen, baby aspirin, cigarettes, alcohol, etc.

I understand the 420 folks wanting the freedom to light up - to get high.  They don't perceive a danger in it - mainly due to the mellow side it invokes whenever one inhales.  Additionally - folks often cite marijuana as safer than alcohol because folks don't get violent .  It can quiet their minds, get them to loosen up, etc. in a state of mind that they perceive as not being a threat to anyone.

okaaaaaaay.....

Then there's those where medical marijuana actually improves their quality of life with very little if any side effects.  Anything we can do as a society to help improve one's condition - I'm strongly in favor of.

Again, I understand the arguments and I believe in a narrow sense medical marijuana is a very beneficial thing.  However we're still talking about impairment and this is the argument that goes largely ignored.  It's where the 420 folks equate marijuana smoking to the likes of cigarettes ... which is a flawed argument on many levels considering that cigarettes are far cheaper than MJ and obviously more legal to possess and use than MJ.

Again - if smoking MJ was comparable to smoking cigarettes - then - folks would be smoking cigarettes.

Studying the effects of MJ and attempting to devise an acceptable standard of consumption is still widely ineffective.  The medical marijuana patient will naturally have a higher concentration of the drug in their system because their body forms a resistance to the point where the person can still yield positive effects from smoking it ... but the level of their impairment diminishes the longer they continue smoking.

The medical marijuana patient is not going to show signs of impairment while the recreational users will have their cognitive and decision making centers compromised when they light up.  They often slip into a relaxed state, sometimes euphoric, and make it difficult to concentrate.  This is the underlying reason why laws are in place for using marijuana in the first place.  I understand it's just like alcohol in this regard and yes, we do need laws against drinking and driving.  That's why law enforcement agencies have used blood and breath testing throughout the years to determine if someone is under the influence of alcohol.

With marijuana - it's different.  At this time there's no reliable scientific test that can be administered that can determine whether or not someone's ability is impaired.  Law enforcement folks rely on their observations and their experience with other folks who have been under the influence - as measured guide to determine if someone has their faculties in place.

I'm not trying to suggest that we should be keeping MJ users at bay ... but the MJ people also have to realize that their ability does get impaired just as it does for alcohol ... and until science catches up that can prove whether your tolerance to the drug is impairing you, then accept the laws as they are.  I'm with you that it should work the same way with alcohol ... but then the tradeoff is that anyone with THC in their system is always going to be considered under the influence....

Which way do you want it?

Socialism, really?

...yeah because capitalist greed has really worked out since the R's controlled the barn, hasn't it....

...unless you enjoy 9.x% unemployment, a fledgling housing market and wages that have actually gone down while corporate profits continue to rise while they enjoy the lowest tax rates in 60 years.

Yeah - I don't think you're grasping what Marxism actually is because it's a nice portable talking point that lacks any real depth of understanding of what it means to be a Marxist or a Socialist.

- Do you still have the right to own things?
- Do you have the right to own an automobile?
- Do you have the freedom of choice to determine where you can live?
- Do you have the freedom to choose who you can socialize with?
- Do you still have the right to leave the country's borders whenever you want?
- Do you still have the ability to voice your opinion? To vote? To criticize your elected officials?
- Do you still have the right of self determination?
- Has the government told you what you can and can't achieve in life?
- Does the government instruct you that you'll be a laborer with no chance of being an artist or a entrepreneur or a doctor or an accountant?
- Does your public school system advocate serving the state and to dedicate themselves to serve their leader faithfully?
- Does the government prohibit how you worship to your god of choice?
- Do you still enjoy receiving your news from Fox?

Next time you want to fling the Marxist/Socialist banter ... take a moment to understand exactly what that means. Don't become easy prey to a mere talking point mishap.

Drilling? Drilling? Gone?

An interesting quote from an LA Times article:

"Without a predictable process, companies are going to look at other parts of the world."

Really?

So all this talk about 'drill baby drill' really doesn't mean anything when companies are wanting more reliable, more predictable processes when they want to harvest oil from the ground.

Imagine that.

Republican Skew

According to the Republican mantra:

It's not okay to marry if you're gay or lesbian ...
- but it's perfectly okay to marry your cousin or get divorced 4 times

It's not okay to give to the poor ...
- but it's perfectly okay to continually help out the rich

It's not okay to nationalize our energy needs ...
- but it's okay to leave that to corporations who continually abuse the public trust - all in the name of profit while industries, families and our government continue to pay for inflated gas prices.

It's not okay to complain about Republican hypocrisies ...
- but it's okay to attack those that are liberal minded who actually have good sound ideas that happen to conflict with the Republican ideology.

It's okay to espouse a moral Republican agenda ...
- but it's not okay to be free to do as you please ... so as long as it has a stamp of approval from the Republican overlords.

It's okay to tax the lower class who have nothing ...
- but it's not okay to take the upper class because they pay for everything.

It's okay to put an innocent man to death ...
- but it's not okay to afford that man a reasonable appeal process in an effort to exonerate him or prove his/her innocence.

It's okay to own, possess and carry firearms ...
- but just not everybody.

It's okay to criticize a black president and claim it has nothing to do with race ...
- but it's not okay to point out their racial blinders if it was a white man who was opined the same idea and they agree with the idea.

It's okay to repeal laws that help equality ...
- but it's not okay to refer to it as "the war on women"

It's okay to end affirmative action ...
- but it's not okay to call out the racially charged statement if a Republican says that because a black man became president, that's why we can repeal affirmative action.

It's okay to enact laws to do away with labor unions ...
- but it's not okay to enact laws to help protect against corporate abuse at the expense of American jobs, wages and way of life.

It's okay to drill baby drill ...
- but it's not okay to hold corporations accountable when they drive up gas prices because they rest their laurels on "it's what the market will bear."


A woman's right ends the moment she has sex with a man ...

- but it's okay to cut social programs while allowing churches to hold the right to dismiss health insurance simply because they offer/cover women's health coverage as it pertains to her vagina.

It's okay to vaginally rape a woman to guilt her into not having an abortion ...
- but it's not okay to hold the man who impregnated her to be bound by his obligation.

It's okay to practice social/economic Darwinism ...
- but you can't teach its science equivalent in class because it clashes with the Christian belief structure...

It's okay to say things you don't mean ...
- but it's not okay to hold them accountable for it.

Do as I say ...
- ...not as they do.

It's not that I don't believe that democrats aren't capable of their own hypocrisy - they are.  But when the Republicans keep hammering home their hypocrisy draped with the American flag and a bible in their hand ... well - then I think that speaks volumes.  Trusting someone with so many faults - becomes nearly comical.

Folks wonder why Americans hate religion and hate politics.  When one's word carries nothing ... then they could be the most articulate person on the planet ... and it won't mean a single damn thing....

Drill Baby .... drill?

I watched a news program that talked about Chesapeake natural gas - which is the second leading producer of natural gas in the country.

Now I will admit that I don't know all of the nuances of why the CEO is under fire - but one of the allegations that the news story reported was .... they were mining too much natural gas.... and that by flooding the market with cheaper natural gas.

Wait.  Wait.  What?

It's the mantra of the Republican Party: Drill, Baby, Drill.

But it's not about making America energy independent ... it's about making profit by drilling and making more profit while the government continues to award subsidized tax breaks on the shoulders of tax payers while enjoying wonderful profits.

It's stuff like this which makes me crazy.

It's soooo disingenuous to say that they want the country to be energy independent from the oil-mongers of the Middle East.  The reality is - the GOP is jealous of the profit the Middle East barons make ... not that they have any real interest in weening off the country off of foreign oil.  It's their selling tactic ... sleight of hand ... diversionary tactics.

It's the foreign profits THEY are after.

The Day the 'verse went right

Mark this day down.  It's an important one.

Today marked the day that a sitting President, who is able to do many things from his position - acknowledged that gays and lesbians deserve the same rights as their heterosexual counterparts.  Today marked the first time this President went on record - into the camera and said: "...I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married."

Kudos Sir.  Kudos.

But while the universe finally smiled on something positive for a change ... I caution that now is not the time to break out the streamers and noise makers.

The hard part is going to be approaching ... very .... quickly.


I know Gay and lesbians have been frustrated with this President's stance on gay marriage.  Understandably so.  I can draw the same inferences of a black man - who has ridden against the same bigotry waves towards his ascension to the White House.  Many feel that the President should be more empathetic towards gays and lesbians - as they draw the same bigotry lines that have plagued this country when it the issue was racial equality or giving the women the right to vote.

Again - I understand.

The country's opinion towards same-sex marriage is changing faster than the Republicans who are trying to throw up laws and roadblocks ostensibly to push their own societal agenda contrary to the 70% who are in favor of domestic unions of some kind.  But the reality is that this is a political hot potato and in an election cycle and it's a hot potato that neither candidate can control.  Not when they are trying to do the things they need to win and be the leader for the next four years.

I understand the President's plight.

I also understand the frustration by gays and lesbians who see their window of opportunity fading with the growing masses on the right.  While my political side-kick will disagree with the potential outlook for this upcoming election cycle, there is a possibility that President Obama will be a one-termer ... the topic of gay marriage only bumps up the political temperature a few more degrees.

This will now become an active torpedo in the water for his re-election bid.  The Republicans have been begging Obama to take up the measure so that they can run their ads confirming everyone's fear that he is single-handedly destroying America.  That's the message.  Fox confirmed that on their website tonight.  That's the platform and that's the reason why he has been tentative about going all in even though he knows it's the right thing to do ... but this position alone could swing some Democrats to stay home because they themselves don't believe in that rights should be extended to gays and lesbians.

I know that's a hard pill to swallow - because as a liberal - I would hope that my democratic brethren would be open-minded to the concept of gay marriage. Instead - I find some democrats fearful about the direction the platform would take the country.  I understand the fear - but I consider it an irrational one.  This issue isn't going to be the tear in the fabric of society that's going to bring civilization to a halt.  It's not that grandiose as the Republican message machine says about it.

The movement is about doing what's right.  Just as women's suffrage was in the 1920's or the civil rights movement of the 50's and 60's.

This country is founded on momentum ... and there finally is enough to start pushing outward and onward.

So while I want to take a moment and be happy for so many friends ... I'm looking forward ... and I see problems.  This can only work if the country can unite behind the idea that no group - no matter your background - deserves any kind of maltreatment, bigotry and condemnation by those who believe in their own self-anointed morality.

The simple truth is people deserve to be treated as people - and that's exactly what happened today.

The World We Live In

Nice to see the nice fine homophobic folks of North Carolina have upped the ante when it comes to gays and lesbians.  It's tragic to witness such discourse while they hold a document (the Bible) that supports love, compassion and support for those who need it.

Let's not forget that the Bible says nothing about homosexual relations between men ... or women.

And even if the Bible did say anything ... I'm reminded of the Bartlet episode on the West Wing that definitively proves that the most literal parts of the Bible have been washed and forgotten about ... until some Bible-thumping activist wants to start quoting scripture as though they hold some sort of moral high ground over the rest of us.

They don't ... No one does.  Because this land was founded on the principles of practicing whatever you want to, however you want to, without the tyranny and fear to do so.

The tragedy is that those who vote in favor of the North Carolina measure are now living contrary to God's laws when having absolutely no idea that's what they're doing.  God wouldn't want any of us - to condemn others - even though that has been done under the guise of religion for hundreds of years.  Countries have been conquered for being different and for not practicing their religion as stringently as others were.

The message of kindness, morality and having a strong sense of self that binds us, not divide us ... is the message of God.  Those who hold the Bible to the contrary - simply lacks the comprehension of that notion.

Vigilante justice begets vigilante justice

The State of Florida has a vigilante law which has basically excused a murder that happened.

In the last couple of days, the special prosecutor assigned to the case has ordained that she won't seek a Grand Jury on the matter - thus eliminating the possibility that this case would end up with a murder charge for Zimmerman.

The issue is shining another light on the glaring flaws with the second amendment.  Having a vigilante law - as exists in Florida, Arizona and other places only elevates the situation.  Someone with the background of Zimmerman had a license to carry and under Florida Law ... had the right to chase someone and shoot them in the back when their own life was not in harm's way - but the use of deadly force was somehow protected.

Gun rights folks will defend their right to do what Zimmerman did.  Except I don't own a gun ... I don't see the need to escalate a situation to the point where someone can get really seriously harmed.  I do believe in the notion of self-defense ... but that's not what the vigilante law does.  It gives folks like Zimmerman a license to kill.

It's wrong.

It reinforces the belief that guns in the wrong hands - lead to really unfortunate consequences.

Race plays a big part too.  Because if it was Trayvon who was pulling the trigger and not Zimmerman ... you can BET the resulting outcome would be totally different.  It's time to stop pretending and start acting on vigilante justice when it's convenient for those disturbed who shouldn't have been allowed to carry to begin with.  Zimmerman needs to see his day in court and let a jury of his peers decide his fate.

But thanks to the flawed system of Florida - Zimmerman is now missing - becoming a poster boy for Fox News and a crusader of the NRA.

Zimmerman clearly fears for his life - for good reason.  Vigilante justice begets vigilante justice.

When does it stop?  When will the insanity finally stop?

The Republican Identity Crisis

Confused about the Republican Party?

You're not alone.

This election cycle has really illuminated the Republicans to a whole new level of: "Really?" Take the case of Joe Walsh, tea party darling who hails from the 8th Congressional District of Illinois. He called out the President in what could be seen as the biggest flop in recent times: "I call on the President not to meet with or recognize groups that do not respect women's rights and basic freedoms," Walsh said in a statement, adding that the group has one of the "worst women's rights records in the Middle East."

Really Joe?

If we were to not meet with or recognize groups that don't respect women's rights and basic freedoms - then we would have no choice but to ignore the Republican Party. The "War on Women" has gotten really out of hand, but when you have a US Representative stand up and decry another country's treatment of women while tacitly or overtly making the case to strip women's rights in this country.

Whether it's the invasive rape of a transvaginal ultra-sound, or forcing women to watch horrific videos of abortions, to secretly repealing equal pay provisions that should be the law of the land ... it's the full blown assault on women's rights.

This is fairly reminiscent of Governor's Scott ill-advised drug testing program for food stamp recipients. The effects were staggering. The general population has a drug-addiction rate of about 7%. Since it's inception, the drug-addiction rate found in those applying for food stamps was much lower: 2%. The State of Florida LOST money rather than what it would've cost to have the 2% continue to get food stamps.

 It's a common theme among the Republicans and you have the likes of Fox and Rush to thank for it. The seeds they plant about malcontents, how every food stamp recipient drives $50k SUVs while owning 3 or 4 big screen TVs drive the Republican anger base. The perception is that most of these folks have no concept, no idea why or how these folks come to being homeless, unemployed or needy to begin with. There's a story with everyone - and it's the Republican thick skin that repels such things because: "I'm a self-made man, these people should be to." Which brings me to the biggest identity crisis plaguing today's GOP: being pro-capitalist while singing in church on selective Sundays.

 These folks identify as being "good Christians" based on "family values" ... when the reality is to the contrary. God doesn't want self-made men on the planet. Is that what Jesus was really about? Putting yourself above others? Doing so in a condescending, "tough love" kind of way? Would Jesus be proud of the way you lead your life? I know that's what you try and convince yourself of .... but really?

 I doubt very seriously that Jesus would pass a homeless person asking for a dollar - so that he could scream at them and condemn them for not getting a job, for being a slacker and a waste of space while lashing out for having to pay for everything for them while they sit and do nothing. Find me a Republican that believes Jesus would rather you spit, scorn and protect your capitalist endeavors ... and then ask them why they aren't more Christ like.

When the R's start wanting to preach about morality when they have deficits in the way they approach their own life ... then I'm disinclined to follow the path of someone who believes they are better because they have more money or are lucky enough to have a job that provides for their family. Capitalism laughs and mocks Christianity ... and it's sad to watch those that lead the dual life.

What happens when a Republican looks in a mirror? That ... is the $64,000 question.

The Trayvon Insanity

I don't get it.

In any other jurisdiction, in any other state or city -- Zimmerman would've been arrested and formally charged.

Why?

 Because that's what our system has become. It seems like those that are rushing to Zimmerman's side are the same ones that wanted to throw the switch on Troy Davis. There's a blindness when it comes to certain artifacts on our society. A willful ignorance to a prejudice that a lot of people just outright deny.

So it's not surprising that the Trayvon matter has become a divisive racial issue - except for those that still maintain that race has nothing to do with it because both parties were minorities. Just because they're both minority - that means race can't become an issue?

It's a tragic event that continues to grow and fester with each day Zimmerman remains free. It's interesting hearing and reading the reaction to the story. It's equally troubling in some respects just how much a title like: "neighborhood watch security guard" somehow elevates that person to some sort of exalted status.

It's troubling because Zimmerman has documented incidents involving a domestic violence case against his wife and incidents involving altercations with law enforcement. All it appears Trayvon was guilty of was an empty bag with residue that got him kicked out of school. Drugs didn't play a part into Trayvon's behavior despite law enforcement's tactic of tainting the victim as some sort of drug addict to gain sympathy.

The Trayvon incident underscores the importance of impartiality. Society becomes skewed the moment a law enforcement officer states something - because there's an implied trust with that. Dredging out Trayvon's completely unrelated "drug case" is how the law enforcement side of things likes to taint the case. To paint Trayvon in a particular light. That public trust that goes into the likes of law enforcement becomes an instrument of manipulation and subsequent hand-picking of information that is being disseminated. It happens everyday and yet - there are those that are privately (or publicly) satisfied with blindly following that trust.

It's a convenient marker in a day where media scrambles to get better ratings, more hits and sell more papers. The more sensational and intriguing it becomes, the more they sell in kind. The Trayvon case underscores incredibly GLARING problems with the system - from the way law enforcement reacted, to the prosecution's bizarre rationale for not prosecuting the case, to the press that has covered the case, to the society that has reacted to it.

It is a classic fishbowl of what's wrong with the process ... and yet most Americans really don't care because I don't think they want to know how bad it is. It's better to dream than it is to live your life in reality.

It's about the defeat, not the plan

The GOP has one mission, one plan, one goal.

They don't have a roll out of policy and substance.

They are fixated by a single quest: beat Obama.

They admit it. They don't deny it. They won't even attempt to walk it back.

It's their bed.

So when November rolls around - and I really hope Americans are watching what's happening, there single most important thing to remember is: do you want someone who has a plan for America ... or do you want someone who is only interested in getting the current President outed.

Our founding fathers would be incredibly disappointed in how the GOP has bastardized the election process this time around. The nation is founded by those who want to lead ... LEAD ... not trying to turn this into a Gladiator event. The only platform this party of choice has is: "beat Obama." Beat the man, not the policy. Come up with a better plan? Put it out there, but if Republicans are going into the voting booth this fall to vote for "the other guy" ... then I would really hope that they could honestly say why they were voting in the first place.

Invasion of the GOP Body Snatchers....

I'm not sure what's the deal with the war on women the GOP insist on fighting.

For a political party that strongly advocates "less government, less government" and decries at all the ways the government is invading into our lives ...

...this ... takes .. the cake.

How much more invasive can one be by advocating doctors to vaginally rape a woman just so that they can guilt her about her unborn child? Gary Trudeau's comic strips were spot on - even if a little hard to swallow for the Republican Party.

It's what it is, R's....

You've created this barbaric invasion of a woman's body ... and give not one consideration to the plight of women or how some twisted sense of supreme morality trumps basic common decency.

It's another example of how Republicans espouse themselves to a fuzzy blind layers of "do as I say, not as I do or would want to have happen to me." Such hypocrisy needs to be met with action and I would imagine the women's groups are pretty much lining up against any Republican that is going to throw their support in this.

Reap what you sow R's ...

The Poison of Rush Limbaugh

Rush Limbaugh is a disease.

There's a vile nature to the man and his self-anointed, self-importance, "woe is me, screw you" mentality that lacks any sense of compassion. To those who aspire a God-like path in life, should really evaluate whether or not Jesus would harbor such anger, such resentment and do so without compassion, empathy and love. Those that believe in the tenets of Rush Limbaugh - are un-Christ like.

Yes, he's built a successful money-making empire that's forged on the precepts of hate, sociologic-economic Darwinism that can be whittled down to: "Angry old man, get off my lawn." But he's just an entertainer. An orator with an endless running banter about how the system is failing and it's the liberals that are causing it.

He conveniently applies the history that matters only to him. He, along the likes of Drudge and HuffPo become running commentaries of our daily lives. Each part carrying a significant bias whose slant is dedicated on the base they serve. Our media outlets have become an entrenched version of the Sharks and the Jets ... West Side Story.

But it was Rush that started it.
It was Rush that inspired it.
And there was a fatality that happened along the way: the truth.

Journalism died and prevailing biased commentators prevailed.

History dictates that profound orators sway public opinion and can brainwash people into whatever you want them to think. That's why the likes of some rather notorious dictators have been successful in wooing the masses to follow them wherever, however, whatever.

How does this make it Rush poisonous?

There's a divisiveness.
There's a "you're with me or you're against me" mentality.
There's only one way - his way.
There's hate.
There's vitriol.
There's hypocrisy.
There's self-serving.
There's loathing.
There's self-absorption.
There's very un-Christian-like rhetoric.
There's very counter-intuitive, counter-productive, pro-business, pro-greed, anti-assistance, anti-government, anti-liberal, anti-Christ like behavior.
There's intolerance.

Truthfully ask yourself if this is something Jesus would approve of.

He keeps using the same tagline: "Talent on loan from God," - but there isn't a God out there that would loan out their talent to someone who preaches to be some sort of political deity. It's sad that Rush doesn't get it ... and how he continues to feign superiority when intelligence, morality and common sense trumps someone who gets rich off of instilling his poisonous beliefs on others.

Once you can clue into Rush's tactics ... you can see through the jaded glasses and see the man for who he really is. As the fervor from slut-gate lingers ... it has pulled back a few layers of what kind of man Rush Limbaugh is. As much as I deplore most of what this man says ... I feel sorry for the masses that continually absorb this man's vileness.

We see it in forums.
We see it in our editorials.
We see it in our protests.
We see it in the chain letters and other political discussions.

Rush overestimates that there are more conservatives than liberals. His numbers are artificially created thanks to his longevity on the air. He feeds the red meat base and when those people age and have children ... they indoctrinate them to the likes of Rush and the cycle grows and continues. That's why I say he's a disease.

Rush takes what angers you most ... and makes you more angry about it ... Drudge, Breibart and Fox do their part to shore it up on the media side ... with the slant, bias and lies leaning their way. I won't say that MSNBC and other media outlets don't do their fair share of leaning left ... but when I look at the goals of both sides - I look at the fate of mankind as being a higher priority than those on the right hold important.

The morality of what makes us good ... is being eroded away with the likes of Rush. Most addictions require that moment of epiphany when the clarity of the problem emerges. This recent issue helped jolt some into realizing the "real" man they've been adamantly defending all of these years.

...and they finally opened their eyes.

Limbaugh v. Women

It's not the first time the windbag from Florida opened his mouth to say something disparaging. In fact, we expect it. We all just chalk it up to the windbag and know that he's just an asshole. A lot of the GOP adore and love this man - which is why I'm about to unearth one of the most shattering news pieces of all time:

Rush Limbaugh is a sexually frustrated lonely man.

There. I said it.

His war on women this week adds the last bit of proof that this man has more experience with sluts and prostitutes than anyone else in his listenership. Followers of Limbaugh will of course deny this. But if you are someone baring double X chromosomes - then I hate to break the news that you are have been classified a slut and a prostitute. While you may want to lament, sigh or otherwise delve into a depression, Limbaugh advocates that you are encouraged to make porn videos just so that you can make the XY chromosomes more attracted to you.

Yes - this is Limbaugh's new way to stoop to a new low. Oh - yes, he has given an apology (dare we even try to call it that) where he continues to banter about his political points ... while giving a "sincere [apology]" at the end of the 192 word statement.

"I'm sorry" is two words, maybe three if you insist on not using contractions.

"I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices." is 12 words.

So for the other 180 words, we're left with Rush's insistent banter and continued political jabs. It's not an apology when it has to be heavily prefaced and rolled into yet another distorted opinionated monologue that extends beyond the principles of the apology. No - Mr. Limbaugh, apologies can be reduced to a single sentence.

But instead of using the 180 words to complete the oratory of the apology, it became nothing more than a preface, a conditional, forced, coerced apology after the windbag realized that he was losing many of his sponsors as a result of his increased arrogance and myopic slant of the world.

The man has been married 4 times and it's not entirely surprising to figure out why women can't stay with him. He's a has been. He's out of touch and incredibly set in his ways where "he-can-do-no-wrong." His ego can't handle it and thus - the reason why he is a man destined to be on his own island. Therefore ... he's a lonely, angry, angry man.

It's only when his show was threatened - that he realized he went too far.

It's not that he apologized for his viewpoint - or that he took back the words he said. He merely apologized for his words directed at Ms. Fluke. He doesn't think he was wrong. Rush doesn't work that way.

The "apology" came a day after the President of the United States personally contacted Ms. Fluke to apologize for the atrocious behavior of the old windbag. Did Rush accept Obama's action? No. Instead - Limbaugh upped the ante:

"Limbaugh also reacted to President Obama's call to Fluke. Obama told Fluke that her parents should be "proud" of her. Limbaugh had a different message for them. "I'd be embarrassed," he said. "I'd disconnect the phone. I'd go into hiding.""

If Rush was genuinely giving a mea culpa apology - he would've issued a full retraction and left it at that. No other political bantering or trying to "explain away" the apology he was attempting to make. Additionally, he should've apologized to Ms. Fluke's parents as well. I'll even add that he didn't even need to apologize to the President .... but that shows what kind of class of human we're dealing with.

If Limbaugh managed to use half of his brain cells for 30 seconds, he would've realized that Ms. Fluke was attending Georgetown University as a law graduate student. The average cost to attend this prestigious university is $59 thousand year that comes with private health insurance. Read that again - private health insurance. Ms. Fluke merely made a reasonable case to the university that challenged the law about contraceptives being covered.

- It's a private university.
- It's private health insurance with the university.
- We aren't talking about medicare.
- We aren't talking about a public funded health care program
- We're talking about someone who forks out 2 1/2 times the average minimum wage earner makes in a single year.

Regardless of the rationale of WHY she wanted contraception in the first place ... the fact she's forking out $59k a year to attend a university should be AMPLE enough to throw in some birth control pills for her personal use if she so desires it.

If that makes her a slut or a prostitute in Limbaugh's estimation then the man speaks volumes about his own loneliness. Oh - and if Rush was offended, then "I sincerely apologize for the insulting word choices."

There Rush. Doesn't that make it all square between us?

Breibart

Normally I try to take the high road when it comes to the passing of someone on the republican side of things. We're all human beings, with very differing points of view, but in the end - we're all sailing on the same sea of life. Andrew Breibart was a die hard Republican who was very unapologetic about his views. He would say angry, hateful things because - he could. He felt he was right, justified and otherwise morally superior to attack any democrat or liberal that stood in front of his view.

When someone wants to project themselves in such a manner - it makes him look weaker, less informed and even dense. To be so dismissive while being incredibly antagonistic, hateful and blind to their actions and speech. I've always marveled at how these folks can live with themselves when harboring such ill-will towards anyone that presents a complete argument that is morally stronger than the one they hold. Breibart made his living capitalizing on the morally gray area of what is considered true. Between he, Murdoch and Limbaugh ... the lines of truth get skewed behind a plethora of money that backs corporate media propaganda.

So when I heard about his passing this week - I admit I was conflicted for the first few minutes. I was sad for his family and close friends ... and then I began to take the high road - pointing out differences of viewpoints. Unfortunately, I stopped feeling badly for him when I recalled all of the angry, hateful things he did in the name of politics. The vitriol, the condemnation, the lack of respect, the absence of responsibility - while focused on the stories he wanted to tell - vs. - being truthful.

I was prepared to let his abysmal behavior slide .... until ....

The Fox fake tears, the "warrior tributes," and the enormous outpouring for someone they defend as a champion to their cause.

Cause?

What cause would that be?

Republicans would say that it's the the cause of "taking back their country." As though having control for 8 years didn't do enough harm that got us into this mess to begin with. They of course don't see it that way because they consistently buy into the buffet line that Breibart, Murdoch and Drudge keep dishing out. What Republicans don't seem to understand is how isolated these outlets have kept them. Republican buy into the fact that they have a "fair and balanced" view because that's what the keepers keep telling them...

It all keeps coming back to the irrational perception folks have about their sources of information. That's why I laugh at the notion that Andrew was some sort of warrior for their cause.

That's not what journalism was ever meant to be about. I don't care if it's left, right, libertarian, socialism, or whatever -ism you choose to subscribe to. Journalism is controlled by the media overlords ... and if you want to keep your job - you have to write the stories in a way that's going to satisfy them.

That's why I felt that by trying to push off Breibart's death as some sort of national loss demonstrates the ineptness of the "crusade" he led. When hate, misinformation, deceit and propaganda replace truth, compassion, and unification ... then I hate to say this, but his death probably did more good for the nation than his did being alive.

I understand that there are those that will mourn his loss ... and it disappoints me that I won't be one of them. However, I won't be celebrating in the streets either. I won't be firing off guns as though I've been liberated. But feeling sorry for someone who would wish that a liberal like me die ... no ... I will feel sorry that he wasted his life in such pursuits and has such disdain about him. I will feel sorry for those that mourn the passing of someone consumed with such vile and hate. I will feel sorry for those that believed the stories crafted under the guise of journalism. I will continue to feel sorry for those that operate with a close mind when they think they are open to the world.

Those are things worthy of feeling sad for ... not the passing of some self-absorbed, corporately consumed egomaniac who relished in the downfall of someone if they happened to be ideologically different than he was.

Unions are Destroying America!

No they aren't....

Despite the best antics on the conservative side of the aisle, unions are an essential part of the overwhelming majority of Americans. If you're working your 40 hour a week job, most of the labor protections came as a result of unions. You can try to deny it - but if you work 40 hours and get paid overtime for working over 40 hours ... you can thank unions for that. Grateful to have weekends off? Thank the unions. Benefits? Health care? Vacation time? Pensions? Unions paved the way for all of us.

"But do we still need them?"

Yes we do. Think about it for a moment. Do CEOs have a responsibility to shareholders or their employees? Let me rephrase the question better - what do CEOs have a higher level of responsibility to?

Ahhh yes - the power of the mighty shareholder.

It's the fall back answer for nearly 90 percent of conservatives who believe that unions are the bad guy ... while major corporations continue to reel off profits every quarter. The shareholder has a vested interest - but so does the American worker. The problem is - the shareholder has a vote - a say - in what happens with the company. The employee doesn't. If you don't like it - there's the door.

Unions level the playing field for the American worker.

Furthermore there's legislative action that want to roll back employment protections for workers. Make it easier to hire children because their labor is cheaper. Make it easier to force workers to work over 40 hours a week without compensation ... and even slashing benefits and vacation time because "the company needs this sacrifice."

"But unions milk money and cost companies a lot of money."

So do CEOs, CFOs, boards and other executives who continually line their golden parachutes ... for themselves ... rather than the much SMALLER piece of the pie that unions "milk" from their members or from companies. It's hard to call the kettle black when watching a $400 million payout with stock and other benefits being laid out for someone who drove a company into the ground.

Sorry - you're not going to get much sympathy from me.

"But it's socialism!"

The ever infamous last resort of conservatives who really don't understand exactly what socialism is. We are as close to socialism as I am from dancing as a ballerina in Swan Lake. "But it's the start of the slope!" .... no it's not. Everything in life can't be run on a purely capitalist, anti-union system.

But instead of being satisfied with something in the middle, unions are crumbling right and left. If you look at the amount of unions around today ... in comparison to the last 50-100 years ... you'd understand that it's a fallacy that "unions are destroying America!"

The greed-fest and Corporatocracy this nation has been enduring since the Reagan years is the lone culprit. Even as unions continue to represent less of the American work force, companies and corporations continue to exploit agreements that take jobs out of the country. That's why there are shoe plants in Taiwan that employ young kids in sweat shops. The Republican party has become whores for corporations and companies ... thoroughly unable or unwilling to do the right thing for their constituents because they believe their constituents are companies and corporations .... not American people.

"Obama is just as bad as Republicans when it comes to this."

Could actually be a fair point - but Obama knows that no matter how idealistic he was when he took office ... the Republicans were going to drag their heels on every single piece of legislation. So Obama knows he has imperfect legislation - but it's better than no legislation at all.

Look in the details. Look who benefits. Look who gains. Look who wins.

It's not the union you should worry about. It's that corporate fat cat dolling out hundred dollar bills to the whores he pays for. That's who's destroying America...

Loss is Loss

The recent death of Whitney Houston has brought out the ire in a lot of folks that say that there's people dying all the time overseas and they aren't celebrated as much as Whitney has been.

Very fair point.

Loss is loss. Whether we know that sergeant who has a family of 4 or the singer whose life was curtailed by drugs or other substances - both people leave behind a following of folks that are affected. Granted, the sergeant won't get the accolades or constant banner headlines as much as Whitney did, but I'd argue that the families of the sergeant wouldn't want that during their time of grief anyway.

So while I understand the arguments from both sides - we have two people gone from our collective lives. I don't have to know the sergeant to bereave his loss or the loss to his family. I don't have to know Whitney or the tabloid-esque story she lived to bereave her loss to an industry as an entertainer.

Now...

For those that say that I have no right or claim to feel sad for Whitney's passing because "you never knew her" - well those folks lead a very narrow view in life. I'm not about to tell someone how or under which circumstances by which they should or shouldn't grieve. Who am I to say what affects a person? Just because I hadn't personally shook the hands of the deceased doesn't mean I shouldn't be sad or affected by their passing.

Grief is personal. How I choose to grieve or not grieve is my personal decision as it is yours. Grieving is a natural part of life because all things eventually pass on. So instead of building up walls or processes that doesn't allow those emotions to be absorbed ... we grieve because we embrace life and those who we have allowed into our lives.

Christian Hypocrisy?

...is alive and well....

I don't mean to knock all Christians, but if you're going to throw your weight behind a candidate that demeans the poor or supports big business or doesn't think there's a problem of denying healthcare to those who need it ... then you need to reflect on this a bit.

Christianity isn't a get into heaven free card. If you're going to be moral in your life, then it just doesn't stop after you leave church every Sunday.

HP: Christianity? Really?

A post on HP about a blogger that is being sent back home to face the death penalty got my attention. One of the comments was from some person who thinks we should be grateful that we live in a Christian country. Of course - I took exception to that....


A Christian country that promotes immoral prejudices against recognizable groups in the populace?

A Christian country that advocates a woman's right to choose is negated because it violates the beliefs of the Christian's book of following?

A Christian country that adamantly defends the birth of unborn babies while delivering potentially innocent people to the gas chamber?

A Christian country that rigorously defends the acquisition of wealth while stripping the benefits from those who need it?

A Christian country that routinely practices theological prejudice against other faiths when this country was founded on the principle of freedom to practice whatever religion you wanted?

A Christian country who has tangent cults who continue to picket the funerals of our bravest -- who use the Christian book of following to defend their incredibly immoral, unpatriotic behavior?

Is THIS the Christian country you speak of?

Newt, Newt, Newt....

I know these are still the primaries and I usually don't pay that close attention, but there are some really crazy things these candidates have been saying on the campaign trail:

Herman Cain: "We need a leader, not a reader." No Herb, we need educated folks making key decisions who can READ as well as listen. That's how you lead, sir.

Mitt Romney: "PETA is not happy that my dog likes fresh air." *Facepalms* #Mitt_fail

Rick Perry: "I will tell you: It's three agencies of government, when I get there, that are gone: Commerce, Education and the... what's the third one there? Let's see... OK. So Commerce, Education and the... The third agency of government I would... I would do away with the Education, the... Commerce and... let's see... I can't. The third one, I can't. Sorry. Oops." .... don't feel bad Rick. There are other things that you could've forgotten like the .... let's see. I can't ... Sorry, oops.

Newt Gingrich: "The idea that a congressman would be tainted by accepting money from private industry or private sources is essentially a socialist argument." Coming from a socialist fear monger like yourself, you don't seem to have a problem with special interests governing because after all, special interests are people too.

Michele Bachmann: "Carbon dioxide is portrayed as harmful. But there isn't even one study that can be produced that shows that carbon dioxide is a harmful gas." ... volunteers herself for the study that she can live on carbon dioxide alone. Reason #412 why politicians shouldn't try to pretend to be scientists.

Rick Perry: "Juarez is reported to be the most dangerous city in America." ... which would be accurate if only Juarez was actually in America.

Rick Santorum: "I don't want to make black people's lives better by giving them somebody else's money; I want to give them the opportunity to go out and earn the money." ...because he's okay with making white people's lives better, but if you're black - whoa now ... that's just crazy talk.

But then it comes back to Newt.

Newt lives for soundbytes. Unfortunately for him, his soundbytes tend to follow him. So when he comes out all pious and moral ... he casually forgets that he's been married three times, with relationships that were overlapping, not to mention getting rid of his wives when they got sick and yet having the audacity to say that gays represent harm to the institution of marriage. We hadn't even begun to pry the door regarding his desire for an "open marriage" with his second wife.

Now I'm divorced. I don't have a problem with people who marry and get divorced, but you can't hold yourself as being a beacon of family issues when you're peeing on the institution. You lose credibility the moment that you want to be a values candidate for the White House. That's why the exchange between Newt and John King represents a candidate who lives the double life. "Do as I say, not as I do." For a party that focuses squarely on morality and having a warped sense of being ideologically square with God ... I'm dismayed when candidates and those that support them ... find themselves in questionable waters like this. Thankfully the press is NOT giving Newt a free pass on his transgressions.

I don't condemn what Newt did or didn't do in his marriages. That's his business.

...but he loses that morality license and reasonable expectation of privacy the moment he wants to start condemning others for being less than moral.

Stone? Meet glass house.

The Loss of Hope

My hiatus from SpoonsRant was something that I didn’t anticipate. I thought I would continue to blog about all things political. After all politics continues to happen regardless of what’s happening in our daily lives. But I found my frustrations growing with this administration. It had nothing to do with the weak tea party or the subsequent Republican floggings about why Obama is bad this week. My focus for the last three years has been squarely on our President and the Democratic party.

I was disappointed that there was an overemphasis placed on cooperative government. Obama reached far too often across the aisle … and ended up selling the store, the dog, the cat, the parakeet, grandma … and getting nothing in return. The Republicans managed to marginalize Obama’s political capital and they weren’t going to turn loose. Democrats remained too unfocused and scattered across the political spectrum (Landreu, Nelson and other conservative Democrats) that ultimately lacked cohesion.

It was thanks to these centralist Dems that awarded power back to the Republicans. It was thanks to Obama benching his platform because the job was too tough to pass it. The country ran with no steward. The helm just kept going with the ebb and flow of the sea current. The captain wasn’t on the bridge – leading – as much as he was trying to quiet the crew … with over half of them fighting him on every single solitary thing.

What got lost in the last two years – is the fact that Republicans refused, every morsel of their being, to work with Democrats or this President on the overwhelming majority of legislation coming out. That forced Obama and the Democrats to continually give up ground – and their fights were watered down and lost. Reid lost respectability. Pelosi fought inconsistently. Americans lost out.

Hope … was lost.

Now that we’re entering the last leg to determine who Obama’s opponent is going to be, I’m back to wondering what Obama is going to say next. I’m wondering how he’s going to be able to justify the stuff he has done over the last three years. Yes – he’s done plenty. He’s done big things … he’s done a lot of medium and little things. He had such high hopes. He had such a vision. He energized those that helped get him elected to fulfill those ambitions.

While the finger pointing can be squarely on the Republicans, the Democrats did their fair share of eating their young. Obama himself became a microcosm of being too idealistic and not being able to reach as far as he wanted. It hasn’t been until the last 3-4 months that we’re finally seeing a commander that’s commanding. Someone who has finally said “enough” and did something big, bold and bad … he called out the Republicans and put it on the line. He finally started calling the Republican’s bluff. Lines are drawn in the sand now … and that’s what Obama should’ve been doing when the R’s decided they were going to behave like insolent disrespectful children.

For as long as we have the likes of Fox and Rush continuing their epic distortions and incredibly self-serving biases … Obama doesn’t stand a chance. He was patient. He tried, kept trying, regardless of what it meant to him politically, this President kept his arm extended while the Republican party spat on him. There is no shame for Republicans and that’s why I can find no respect for them.

So We Were Right All Along...

The New Yorker magazine has an incredible quote from "two well-known Washington political analysts, Thomas Mann, of the bipartisan Brookings Institution, and Norman Ornstein, of the conservative American Enteriprise Institute:

"One of our two major parties, the Republicans, has become an insurgent outlier—ideologically extreme, contemptuous of the inherited social and economic policy regime, scornful of compromise, unpersuaded by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science, and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition"

Read more at the New Yorker magazine: click here

A very interesting read about how Obama tried to assert himself as a post-ideological politician following his election bid.

The Inner Discussion with a fake Republican

The Republican populists tend to invoke the: "if only everyone would work, there wouldn't be any problems." It's a common theme. All problems would be solved if everyone would get jobs at McDonald's and other places like that. It's not that I don't condemn those who have prospering careers are fast food restaurants, but the stigma and stereotype is that these types of places don't pay very well and don't have a lot of benefits. You could include WalMart in this group - but I'm focused on fast food because of a conversation I over heard at Arby's today.

A worker was showing up ... a leader was asking to see how they were doing. It was apparent that the worker was in ill-health and was coming back to work. The team leader was sympathetic and was genuinely concerned. It was nice to see the exchange. The worker was asked about her daughter as she had been under the weather too apparently. The worker said her daughter was fighting a fever of 106 ... unknown what, if any medical attention this woman got for her girl ... but an internal dialogue between me and a hypothetical Republican transpired in my head:

Republican: "I'm glad to see this mother is off the welfare dime and is working hard."

Me: "She's working hard - at a rate of $7/hr."

R: "But at least she has a job."

Me: "Alright, but she has no health care because of her position. Are you okay with that?"

R: "Well she should assert herself so that she can go back to school and get a better job."

Me: "That's fine and dandy in a perfect world, but she likely has more than one job just to try to make ends meet. If she has no health insurance, how can she pay to have her child get the medical attention she needs ... a 106 temperature is actually life threatening."

R: "I'm sorry her child is going through that, but it's not my problem."

Me: "Then why not have a single payer health care system?"

R: "Because it's socialism."

Me: "So is driving your car on a public road or going into a public library or having the police respond to a break-in at your residence."

R: "Those are necessary elements for a society."

Me: "Why isn't health care included as a necessary element for a society?"

R: "Because socialism stunts the growth of health advances, it removes freedoms and the government tells us what to do."

Me: "For profit health care stunts the growth of a flourishing society. It removes any chance of receiving health care and government protects the health insurance companies right to deny coverage."

R: "Health care companies have a responsibility to their stockholders."

Me: "Health care professionals have an ethical responsibility to those they care for ... they don't have an ethical responsibility to their bottom line."

R: "The woman should be grateful she even has a job."

Me: "I'm sure she is grateful. So you have no problem with this woman inheriting thousands of dollars in health care costs who is working at a fast food establishment trying to do the right thing for her family?"

R: "Not my responsibility, she should've done more to apply herself in school."

Me: "But the Republican position is that not everyone needs an education, that there are jobs like fast food that don't need an education or college - yet you assert that this woman should've applied herself better in school. How do you reconcile that?"

R: "It's not society's responsibility to take care of her."

Me: "But it's corporatism that has now taken a responsible member of society and have burdened them in debt."

R: "Not my problem. Society can't take care of everyone."

Me: "Agreed to an extent. I do think that we're all products of our choices, but our society has changed so dramatically with each generation - going from a single breadwinner to a two-household income situation and families are struggling."

R: "Shit happens to everyone. I can't be responsible for everyone who bought the flat LCD screen when they should've been investing their money."

Me: "Investing? If everyone invested their money - you'd bring this economy to a grinding halt."

R: "No it wouldn't - there would still be supply and demand."

Me: "With no demand, there's too much supply, people lose their jobs because no one is buying their product or service."

R: "That's ridiculous, everyone would buy something."

Me: "Not according to your critique about flat LCD screens. If everyone were to invest their money and not get LCD screens, manufacturers wouldn't hire people to make those screens, companies couldn't invest that money to developing newer, better TVs and WalMart would furlough those people who stock the LCD screens due to diminished sales."

R: "That's too simplistic..."

Me: "But it's the same supply v. demand concept you create - adjusting for the conditions of everyone investing the money you want them to. So if everyone was as responsible as you, if everyone pulled themselves up by their bootstraps just like you, then the world would be righteous?"

R: "Something like that. I earned everything I have. I wasn't given anything for doing the right thing."

Me: "You were too. You were afforded every paved stone that has been placed at your feet by every previous generation. To say you were not given some benefit isn't accurate."

R: "I don't owe anyone anything, nor was I given anything."

Me: "Did you invent the light bulb?"

R: "No, but -"

Me: "...but you benefit from Thomas Edison's invention and can go into a store and purchase such an invention to use in your residence."

R: "Yes..."

Me: "So you are a benefactor of someone else's labor."

R: "That's completely simplistic. I could credit God for the same thing for inventing air."

Me: "That's true. The question is - what have you given back to society?"

R: "I give it to those crooks in Washington who steal it and they give it to lazy asses who won't work. They just smoke their Parliaments and eat bon-bons all day long."

Me: "But aren't they supporting industries you might have stock in? So while they might be subsidized and buying tobacco or sugar foods, you're still getting back benefits in the form of dividends aren't you?"

R: "Well ... I .... what?"

The Occupy, Tea Bag, 99% Problem

I just love how the Republicans and Tea Bag crowd continue to decry the Occupy Wall Street movement. Little do they know but at least when it comes to the Tea Bag party ... they are not unlike their Occupy breathren. Both groups vocally protest their dissatisfaction with the way things are being run. One group chooses to blame the government, the other group blames the fat cats.

Tea Baggers come out against Occupy Wall Street - OWS come out against the Baggers and there's a free for all somewhere in Central Park. It's not unusual to have these sprig parties sprout out every election cycle. There was the Green party, the Ross Perot party, the Gary Coleman party (okay - that was a typo..) But the prevailing two parties have remained relatively unscathed throughout history. That's not going to change anytime soon - but the reality is that as populist as some candidates have been (ahem, Obama) ... what matters is their service to the American people. Despite the Republican view on this, I subscribe to the belief that our electorate is there to represent the American people ... not American corporations and businesses.

That's why I haven't signed onto the OWS crowd as much as I've embraced the 99% movement. Because it's the 99% that continues to work hard everyday, see to their child's education, care and provide for their family while getting hammered by the lack of rise when it comes to salaries. That's why there's no single breadwinners in families these days. That's why both parents are needing to work to make ends meet and try to lay some sort of foundation for their family's future. Benefits are getting slashed, health care is out of reach for so many Americans, and there's a significant amount of the right side of the aisle that has NO PROBLEM with it. Our previous President once said that it's "uniquely American" to have such problems....

"Corporations are entitled to maximize their profits."
"Corporations have a duty and responsibility to their shareholders."
"It's not up businesses to take care of their employees..."

Really?

These are the folks you're protecting?

This is the philosophy you subscribe to?

The Tea Baggers and Republicans that continue to defend big business - they themselves fall well within the 99%, they continue to protect big industry, big banks, big pharma and big oil ... for reasons that simply don't make sense. The illusion that if you give the rich enough money - it'll trickle down to you - is a proven falsehood. The rate of salary increases have remain stagnant since Reagan's infamous boondoggle. The rich remain rich, while the poor remain poor and the middle class finds themselves on the endangered species list.

Even though they themselves are equally susceptible to the other 99%'ers out there in terms of job and benefit security. Sure - they have a nice paying job and can complain about others not doing enough to get their own damn job. Easy for them to say when unemployment has suffered mightily under the great recession. Easy for them .... until they find themselves on their own receiving end of it. Companies have no loyalty to their employees - as we've seen with the shift of jobs overseas. If you get a life-threatening condition - Sarah Palin's death panels will instantly be enacted to ensure that because you have become a liability of the company and you will lose your job and your benefits. It's all about profits, right Sarah?

Try treating cancer on unemployment after you've already emptied out your life's savings that you had HOPED was going to buoy your retirement ... and let's see if you still want to protect big pharma.

These folks are equally affected by the deregulation of food, water, air, and work conditions. Is profit really worth it if your water is laced with ignitable gas? Or the beef you get at the store tainted and contaminated? Or the factory you work in has asbestos in the walls and ceilings? Is the profit worth it to you then? The 99% seeks the balance against businesses and corporations from polluting and endangering employees lives for profit. A well known company that won't settle $300k in OSHA fines and making work condition improvements while guarding their CEO's $4 million salary (and $6 mil mansion) just doesn't resonate well with the 99%ers. It's not that we don't think a CEO is worth $4 million. "The market sets the rate" - and I'm okay with that, but if you're doing it at the EXPENSE of others - then I'm not going to be okay with that. Whether its petitioning to loosen pollution controls or having agencies turning a blind eye to their unfair business practices. "Everything in the name of profit" has become the new mantra for the 21st century, "damn the employees and the world we build it on, I want my 4th yacht because I've grown tired of the first 3."

Elizabeth Warren, who is now running for Senate in Massachusetts has it right. “There is nobody in this country who got rich on their own. Nobody. You built a factory out there - good for you. But I want to be clear. You moved your goods to market on roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn't have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory... Now look. You built a factory and it turned into something terrific or a great idea - God bless! Keep a hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.”

That's not socialism folks. That's being socially responsible. The false information of Rush, the banter of Beck and the mis-guided network known as Fox ... all do their part to press forward with the fear of socialism. Even though they casually neglect to point out that we already live in a pretty fair amount of socialism as it is ... not everything can or should be turned into a capitalized profit. Elizabeth's point is simple: everybody is responsible for paying back to society in order to get back from society the kinds of things we all enjoy. The problem is that with corporations going overseas and doing everything they can to avoid paying their taxes like G.E., then there is no investment happening back in the country that allowed them to flourish to begin with. Anyone who believes that's a form of socialism really needs to examine their history and look back at what socialism actually was back in the days of the Soviet Union - who was a Socialist Republic. The nation was impoverished and kept that way ... there was no 1%, there was no middle class, there were no SUV's or WalMarts where you could buy your flat screen TV using your Visa card. If you truly think you know what socialism is - then you can clearly see that this country is not even close to the big red scare like Fox continues to advertise.

If you're finding yourself protecting the 1%'ers ... then maybe you should begin to ask yourself why. When the majority of the 99%'ers make up folks on the Democrat and Republican side - it's no longer a political issue, but an ideological one. It's not that I want all of us to feel entitled to what they have. That's not my argument. But when these companies focus on profit over responsibility - then that's my argument. If you're not going to show much loyalty to the country that gives you the right to have your business, or to the employees that work hard for your company ... then you really need to sit down and examine why your loyalties are with businesses who conduct themselves as cowardly as they do.

Are you trying to protect your job? Your stock portfolio? Are you content being complicit as these companies lay off workers or break the laws - forcing them to work over 40 hours but not be entitled to the benefits of a full time employee? Are you sleeping well at night with your $100/quarter dividend check because the company you're invested in wants to lie and cheat to stay ahead? Is that the capitalism dream that you subscribe to?

Is that your definition of what America is about?

Then I challenge you to examine how you got to think about yourself over your country. Were you misguided by the man sitting behind the golden microphone who thinks pretty highly of himself? Or were you misguided by the network that claims to be fair and balanced - yet is anything BUT fair and balanced? If you're offended that I'm tackling your two big idols it's because I take great offense of those that seek to put the country behind its citizens and the companies that have enjoyed an incredibly open expanse when it comes to making profit hand over fist.

This country was founded with a unified, hand-in-hand approach that made us stronger than any nation around. While Rush and Fox are entitled to spew whatever opinions they care to - they're doing so irresponsibly and for the sake of themselves. I'm not espousing that we need to revert to a Soviet Socialist regime, but there has got to be a balance with this out of control "it's all about me" attitude that it's okay to disavow the principles of this country ... just so you have some spare change in the jar at the end of the day.

Morally - even Jesus would be mortified.