The Blind Hypocrisy

In his show, Jon Stewart has done it again.

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/faezep/mighty-morphin-position-changers

He poignantly explained the differences of how Fox News covers its new stories. It is a blind hypocrisy for decrying one side of an argument while remaining incredibly silent on the other side. (The video explains a better please click on it.)

But it raises an issue not just specific to Fox News. Every news agency has been doing this for years now. A slant, a bias, a derived message. They've become nothing more than an opinion machines more than news outlets. As I said this happens on both sides of the aisle so it would be improper to demonize one side without admitting that MSNBC does the exact same thing.

Even Rachel Maddow admits that her program and network does pretty much the same thing that Fox does. The only difference is that they tend to be closer routed to the facts than Fox. That's where the debate really lies because if I'm about to tell you story, you're assuming that I am presenting a balanced argument. Especially if you find that I am a news person who you are trusting to provide information to.

It's something that Stephen Colbert once referred to as "truthiness." Defined as:

"the quality of seeming or being felt to be true, even if not necessarily true."

Which is exactly what Fox and MSNBC does. It's what CNN, ABC, NBC and CBS does. That's why it's very disheartening that if you want to get completely unbiased information, you have to go out of the United States to do it where corporate interests may not necessarily interfere with the actual news content.

That's the state of media today.
That's the state of journalism today.

It's something that I have been incredibly passionate about for a long time. We simply cannot rely on any of our news sources for information. We want news that feels good to us and is crafted in a way that molds to our belief of truth.

We have to be willing to look at ourselves in the mirror honestly. We can't do that if we keep wrapping ourselves in red, white, blue. We have all become patriotic to a fault. If we are truly going to be cooperative partners in the future we have to be completely honest with ourselves.

That doesn't make me unpatriotic. I believe in the United States, I believe in our founding fathers belief that we can be a better country for the world. But if we start looking at Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives, it's become a schoolyard of bullies and fights. It makes a lot of people become turned off and it is incredibly despicable to think that our electorate and our propaganda mechanism known as the media insists on lowering the bar instead of raising it.

We have lost accountability.
We have lost honesty.
We have lost integrity.

And before you turn on the radio, or pick up your newspaper, or look online to see how your favorite political hack looks of this - realize that you can make independent decisions based on your own morality and beliefs.

We all have a fundamental basis of what's right and wrong in this country. We can continually point fingers back-and-forth to no avail, but in the end the message gets lost in the truth diminishes.

Admittedly I have probably have grown very tired of politics. I have grown tired of the antics of some idiots that want to go ahead and to question my patriotism because I ask, I demand accountability and honesty when they report their "facts" for the general public.

We as a nation have no concept as to what these dividing forces have on our nation. We are more alike than we think if we were to sit down and have an honest discussion about morality and what should and shouldn't be done in this country. If we stop listening to these dividing forces we can come together and we can grow. I'm sick and tired of rewriting our history and our science to accommodate a religious theocracy that is heavily flawed.

We need to grow. We need to move forward.
Change needs to happen.

Really John?

“Finding common ground is going to be hard work, but it will be even harder if the president isn’t willing to work with us,” Mr. Boehner said in a news conference on Capitol Hill.

Considering this President had reached out to the Republicans CONTINUALLY for the last six years, trying to get them to work with him on legislation ... I consider Mr. Boehner's rhetoric attempt as gutless and disingenuous.

If only Americans really looked at the tally of things over the broader scale. 

- Unemployment = down
- Wages = still stagnant
- Veteran's benefits = still a big problem
- DOW = up
- gas prices = coming down
- US economy = continues to rise
- Budget deficit = returning back to pre-recession levels
- gun ownership = same
- immigration = still a problem
- LGBT rights = improving (finally)
- Another 9/11 = nope
- healthcare system = improved

What's really to fix here John?  Oh wait.  The reason why John is forcing this is because it happened on a Democratic watch.  Republicans have nothing to show for it - and Democrats (in their own "let's shoot ourselves in the foot" way of thinking) failed to latch onto the progress that has been made already.

Keep doing what you're doing.... No really!

I recently read an article where an incumbent Republican from Kansas is in danger of losing his governorship to an independent. At first this didn't raise an eyebrow or anything about it. What it did do was make me cheer on the incumbent Republican to stay to the script. No hedging, no misinterpretation, no fudging. Stay to the script.

Why?

Because it is time for America to see Republicans for who they are. They want to repeal Obamacare even though the number of uninsured has dropped to its lowest level since 1990. They want to secure more tax breaks for businesses who send American jobs overseas. They want to become more invasive and to eliminate basic rights of Americans because "if you have nothing to hide then there shouldn't be a problem."

The problem with the Republicans is where their core beliefs are located. They dwell in the pit of some unknown donor box carefully crafted by corporations who really don't give a damn about Americans. Republicans are steadfast to protect the interest of the shareholder over the interest of their constituents.

That's why I want Republicans to stay on message. Keep these flawed beliefs and don't come off of them. Remain true to yourselves or continue to be the obnoxious hypocrites you're set to be.

Eventually America will get it.

Tired ...

I make absolutely no apologies for being who I am.  I fully realize I'm on the extreme left side of things and I'm perfectly okay with that.  I choose to be an idealist for humanity than a protector of capitalism.  From where I stand, the soul of humanity isn't governed by wealth, but by doing the right things.  I know there are those on the opposite side that say the same thing.  We can respectfully disagree on things - that's fine.

But I'm finding that the "reason" why folks think as they do has very little to do with actual factual reasoning.  The blindness - the willful and complete blindness by my right side counterparts can almost be described as completely insane.  The hypocrisy is alarming and yet they don't care one iota.  They remain smitten that they don't have to be accountable for anything or anyone because "we're right because I heard or read that I am."

Really?

It's an absolute waste of time attempting to argue with folks that can't rationally acknowledge their irrational inconsistencies.  They abhor progress because it disrupts their ultimate game plan of acquisition.  In their universe: nothing else matters.  It's "he who dies with the most toys, wins" mentality which can't be rationalized in the scheme of humanity.

Our founding fathers wanted us to be civil towards one another, to respectfully disagree - but accept the progress of society.  We have none of that.  We continually dwell in our uncivil nature as it continues to push our nation in a downward angle.

So - I'm tired.

I'm tired of the bullshit.
I'm tired of the hypocrisy.
I'm tired of the stubbornness.
I'm tired of the double standards and the expectations that it's okay to be self-absorbed at the expense of everyone else in the world.

We're in retro-progress ... and we are falling behind fast.  Other nations continue to make advances to further their countries.  What's the US doing?  We're bickering and can't agree on table settings.  We are obsessed with gossip and have no willpower to fix problems.

With the ineptness of Congress, I'd personally like every single one fired that ever used the filibuster to contain the progress that could've been made as a country.  I'd like to see those that are adamantly defending corporations to be removed from public office because CORPORATIONS ARE NOT PEOPLE (for the love of all things Zeus!)

Folks that defend corporations are only defending them because they overwhelming majority of Americans aren't for your party.  Republicans have fought to control the media and the influence behind it so that they can continue their shoestring connection with the governing process.  You see, Republicans know that if it was a fair fight, head to head, they'd lose without their corporate backings because their policies fail in the face of the average American.  They continually pull the wool over those that defend them ... and with blind assurances as their measure - they are vilified and feel vindicated.

So.  To those folks that can't rationally understand their shortcomings, I can't help you anymore.  You're mired in the muck that you simply have no desire to get out of.  For those folks who continue to thwart the progress of this country, I'm removing you from my life.  You're no longer in my conscience or on my Facebook feed.  You're no longer the annoying insignificant gnat.  I'm not longer following you on twitter or wherever your little universe is.

I'm done.  Fin. 

The moment you can be a productive member of SOCIETY that makes it about others and not about self-serving your own singular purpose - then we can probably finally begin a meaningful dialogue about solving the problems we face ... together.  In the meantime, keep playing with pennies in light sockets and using hairdryers in the shower.  Oh and if you do that, you'll become more enlightened.  Moreover that logic (and yours, Republicans) comes from the internet so "god it has to be true then."

*bangs head against wall*

The Dangers of Russia

If you're not concerned - you should be.

Russia is poised to become the threat it once was.  Vladamir is doing what's natural for Russian leaders: do whatever you want, screw the consequences. 

It's dangerous territory and the world let him have a bit too much leash.  Unfortunately for all of us, the repercussions of letting Vlad go out and about ... is now we have a nuclear player gone rogue.

It comes down to this: Russia wants the Ukraine for obvious reasons (um, oil - hello!)  So Russia seizes a moment where the Ukraine was vulnerable and just slipped right in before anyone could react.

I know Republicans are blaming Obama - but they blame him for the sun rising each day, so it's moot to take their points seriously.

Who is to blame then?

I'm going out on a limb to say it's nobody's fault - as Vlad took it upon himself to act for the betterment of Russia. 

I've studied 19th century European history.  There's the David Hume reference to "The Balance of Power" by which you ensure everyone has equal dominance so that countries don't fight one another.  The belief is that once these countries fight - it'll end in stalemate while both sides losing heavily in terms of people and having their economies ruined.

When there's a power vacuum as what has taken place in the Ukraine, it's not unheard of for another country to run in and put their flag on their capital.

The world is supposed to run on a system of checks and balances ... but if we're going to play the role of world cop - then exactly how to Republicans expect to FUND being a world cop? 

It's laughable ...

Obama has to go

Yep, I said it.

The big O - done. Gone. Go. Git.

That works if you're a little picture guy.  The guy that wants their news catered and crafted.  It's the kind of real meal you can expect from canned processed meat and starched, over preserved side-dishes.

Folks that want to decry the work Obama has done really elect to avoid looking at the big picture.  For the last 6 years - there has been continual obstructionism.

Deny that if you want - but in no other period of our time has a Congress been so inept and putting self-preservation interests above the national interest.

It's disingenuous to blame Obama and conveniently ignore the role of Conservatives have played in this mess.

For folks blaming Obama - I ask: "how do we know that his policies would've failed when we have a Republican Party that's set out to stop anything he does before it even becomes law?"

It's why we have a broken health care system - because Republicans want to brand Obama with that boondoggle. Nevermind what's best for Americans - they were out to make sure it wasn't a Democrat that did it.  Same thing now with immigration reform and with banking regulations which help us - while finally addressing the real problems.

It's become apparent that no one in Washington wants anything done.  Obama's first moves to try and reconcile the parties made him look weak.  And that was an irrecoverable error on his part.

So pardon my disgust the next time I drive by your anti-Obama sticker only to raise my hand in the form of an L and place it on my forehead.  Because if you're really going to blame Obama - it's time to start bearing some of the responsibility for why things didn't materialize like they should've.

The Message Problem ....

Republicans continue to scratch their heads in trying to figure out what happened last November.  While the finger-pointing continued for several months ... they finally decided that they needed to look at themselves to figure out what went wrong.

Their conclusion?

It's a message problem.

Good, they finally realized ... wait - What?

Let me see if I get this straight.  They think that they lost track of how to convey their message to the American people.  They believed that Obama and the Democrats have a better reach, can articulate their message better and sold the American people on the Path we're on.  The Republicans look to themselves as failing to deliver the message to the American people that would've swayed them to their side.

But there's a problem with that analysis ...

... it's not a message problem.

... it's a belief problem.

If you took a long line and called it the spectrum of politics, the Republicans are in full retreat to their side of the spectrum.  Democrats have shifted more central and that's why a lot of libertarians and many progressive conservatives swung to the left this past election.

A message problem is: "you're confused with what I'm telling you, let me try to put it a different way."
A belief problem is: "you're not thinking along the same lines I am."

And Republicans are notoriously blind and deaf to that notion.

Take health care reform as your example.  The majority of Americans want it.  Majority - which means not just the Democrats or the left-leaners ... this also includes a lot of conservatives - the majority.  Republicans have battered the process - not because they LISTENED to what their constituency said ... it's because they LISTENED to those who are lining their coffers handsomely.

The Republicans have become the advocate for big corporations - and they don't blink an eye at that or try to deny it ... they KNOW that's who they are advocates for because the majority of Americans are signing on with the Democrats.  If you took campaign finance reform - and did away with rich corporate donations - I'm doubtful the Republicans could muster anything beyond a bake sale...

So how did this shift happen?  Reagan won in the 1980's because he continually reached to the center ... and that won him two terms.  It's the same basic formula that Obama has used ... and if the Democrats were smart (not saying they are - but if they were) - then they will keep working the formula they will inherit.

As for Republicans - my only advice is this: start listening to the American people and start paying less attention to those holding the bling at the end of the line.  Remember who you represent - and who the founding fathers told you to represent.  Corporations is not a word in the Constitution, nor is the word "business" or "capitalism."  You guys keep waiving the Constitution like it's a flag - but you fail to administer your own responsibilities to our fabled document.

I dream of a day when our representatives start representing the people that pull the levers every election cycle.  I realize it's a pipe dream - but you have to start somewhere, right?

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!

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.

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....

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.

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 ...

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...

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.