Thursday, November 18, 2010

Respecting the Will of Voters

 Referring to the recent mid-term elections as a "repudiation of politicians who refuse to listen to the American people” (meaning Democrats), House Minority Leader John Boehner pledged a GOP House that would respect the will of voters.  He further proclaimed “The people’s priorities will be our priorities, and the people’s agenda will be our agenda.”

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said before the Heritage Foundation that they must  "listen to the people who sent us here"  and that  "Democrats are ignoring the wishes of the American people."  

Okay. 

A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll released Wednesday revealed that only a third of all Americans think Bush-era tax cuts should be extended for families regardless of how much money they make. 

Forty-nine percent of people questioned in the poll say the tax cuts should be extended for families making less than $250,000 a year, with another 15 percent saying the cuts should not be extended for anyone. That leaves 35 percent who favor an extension of the tax cuts for all Americans regardless of how much money they make.

The poll "also indicates a vast majority of the public is in favor of allowing openly gay people to serve in the U.S. military."

John?  Mitch? Are you listening?

Tuesday, November 9, 2010

They're At It Again

"Republican Anger Over Cost of Obama’s Trip to India Will Not Be Stopped by Facts." 

That was New York magazine's headline to a short article on its website November 5, 2010.  I can't say this any better myself and there's no point in re-inventing the wheel, so here is the article, verbatim. 
Here is what an anonymous Indian official told the Press Trust of India on Tuesday: President Obama would be traveling to India with about 3,000 people, including Secret Service agents, government officials, and journalists at the cost of approximately $200 million a day. Here's what the White House said about those "wildly inflated" figures: "The numbers reported in this article have no basis in reality." Other experts also chimed in. A former Los Angeles Times reporter who covered numerous foreign trips by U.S. presidents said the dollar amount sounded "inflated by a factor of 10," the size of the entourage was "grossly inflated," and pointed out that reporters would actually pay their own way. The Wall Street Journal called it "demonstrably incorrect." FactCheck.org said the accuracy of the anonymous estimates were "highly doubtful," pointing out that the cost of keeping 100,000 troops in Afghanistan costs $190 million per day.  Here's where the GOP — and the Fox News pundits — went with it. Glenn Beck wondered if maybe we should have been worried about Obama's Hindu connection, expressing distaste over "$2 billion for ten days so [Obama] can go see the festival of lights." Sean Hannity pointed out that that sure was a lot of money to visit "one of the biggest mosques in Indonesia." Michele Bachmann told Anderson Cooper, "I think it's not a good signal to send to the American people, when the American people are, quite frankly, struggling right now with high job losses." When Cooper pressed her on the inaccuracy of the figures she was quoting, Bachmann responded, "Well these are the numbers that have been coming out in the press." Ah, yes, that historically trusting bond between the GOP and "the press."

Friday, November 5, 2010

Sparky Anderson

"Sparky was, by far, the best manager I ever played for.  He understood people better than anyone I ever met. His players loved him, he loved his players, and he loved the game of baseball. There isn't another person in baseball like Sparky Anderson."

Pete Rose, former Cincinnati Reds baseball player

Thursday, October 28, 2010

Crazy Republican "Beeatch" Scares and Confuses Six Year Olds

Rep. Jean Schmidt (Republican) represents the congressional district covering Cincinnati, Ohio and its eastern suburbs.  This is the same crazy woman who, in her first year in Congress, called Representative John Murtha a coward for introducing a bill requiring re-deployment of the troops from Iraq. Trouble was, Murtha was a 38 year Marine Corp veteran and a hawk when it came to defense. More from Mean Jean as reported by the NY Daily News:

Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-OH) ventured into the age-inappropriate territory during a speech at a Cincinnati Catholic school, where she addressed a room of students ranging from first to eighth graders.

"Unexpectedly, towards the end of her address, Congresswoman Schmidt brought up the topic of abortion," Prinicipal Dan Teller wrote in a letter to parents, obtained by Cincinnati's WLWT.com. "Your children may come home with questions, especially if this is a topic that has not been broached in your home."

Though the abortion-related portion of the speech was reported to last under two minutes, it may be the only part anyone will remember.

“She defined abortion as the taking of a child's life in the mother's womb,” Teller wrote in the letter. "She indicated that abortion involves the killing of a child before it is born."

Noting that Schmidt "was not invited to further any political agenda,” he apologized to parents "for any confusion or fear that this may elicit on the part of your child, and for the awkward position this may put you in of introducing a difficult issue at a time that may be premature for you."
Totally inappropriate.  This woman is not only crazy but lacks good judgment.  Would you want her representing your interests in Congress?

Wednesday, October 27, 2010

Political Advertising At Its Best

This excellent ad by Portland Oregon Congressman Earl Blumenauer is so positive! It gets the point across without negative comments about others! I wish that other Democrats had used similar ads-and done it early on. It might have gone a long way to quell the voter anger the press keeps talking about.

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

A Vote For a Tea Partier Is a Vote For-

This is what a Republican/tea party vote gets us:
  • Privatization of Social Security.  All of these candidates want to privatize Social Security.  Had George W. Bush's efforts to do this been successful, there would be no Social Security today because all of the money would have been lost in the Wall Street crash of 2009.  Also interesting is that many who support these candidates also carried signs to the town hall meetings during the summer of 2009 that read, "Keep the government's hands off my Medicare!"  It makes no sense.
  • Extremists with kooky fringe beliefs running our country.  We have Sharron Angle,  Republican and tea party candidate for Senate from Nevada, who claims that Dearborn, Michigan is governed by Shari'a Law.  Although there is a large population of Muslims there, it is not governed by Shari'a Law.  Then, there's Christine O'Donnell, Republican and tea party candidate for Vice President Joe Biden's Senate seat in Delaware.  First, she admits to having "dabbled" in witchcraft when she was younger.  Second, she falsely claimed to have studied at Oxford University, Princeton University and Claremont Graduate University.  Although she criticizes her opponent for opposing the teaching of creationism in the schools, she did not know that the establishment clause is in the constitution.  Ohio Republican House candidate Rich Iott dresses up like a Nazi officer.   Jan Brewer, Republican governor of Arizona insisted  that illegal-immigrants are responsible for a reign of terror in Arizona, including beheadings. And, don't forget those who claim that Barack Obama was not born in the United States and that he is a Muslim, with absolutely no evidence to support such claims.  Republican Congressman  and tp'er Trent Frank said, referring to Obama, "He has no place in any station of government and we need to realize that he is an ENEMY OF HUMANITY."   Tea Party member and Delaware congressional candidate  Glen Urquhart: "The exact phrase 'separation of Church and State' came out of Adolph Hitler's mouth, that's where it comes from. So the next time your liberal friends talk about the separation of Church and State, ASK THEM WHY THEY'RE NAZIS."   South Dakota tea party U.S. House candidate Kristi Noem on her 30 traffic and multiple arrest warrants for skipping court: "Obviously, I'm not proud of my driving record, but I've been working hard to be a better example to young kids and young drivers out there."    Carl Paladino, New York Republican gubernatorial candidate, said the following in support of  housing poor people in prisons: "These are beautiful properties with basketball courts, bathroom facilities, toilet facilities. Many young people would love to get the hell out of cities."  
  • Unqualified leaders. When was the last time you applied for a job where having no experience or any other qualifications is a good thing?  A common sentiment in the tea party movement is first and foremost, the ideal candidate is a "Washington outsider" who is not a politician.  Why?  And the less educated, more below average intelligence the candidate the better.  Smart, intellectual people scare the tp'ers.  I don't know about you, but that goes against my grain.  I think it is important to have leadership consisting of people who are much smarter than I am and who have experience.
If that doesn't scare the bejeebers out of you, I don't know what will.  Think about it.  Please.  Before you vote.

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

What about ME??!

The Democrats are the party of  "we."
The Republicans, however, are the party of  "me. me. me. me. me. me. I don't care that these unemployed people have steadily worked hard all their lives, can't find jobs, have gone through their savings and are losing their homes to foreclosure.  I don't care that children don't have health care.   Who cares about these old people on Social Security?  What about me?!  Me, me, me??!  Screw everybody else, I want MY tax break!"

Sunday, October 17, 2010

More Tea Party Shenanigans

From the Huffington Post:
Security guards for Alaska senate candidate Joe Miller handcuffed and detained the editor of the online magazine "Alaska Dispatch" on Sunday while he tried to interview the Republican nominee, according to multiple reports.  The Anchorage Daily News reports that Tony Hopfinger, who founded and edits "Alaska Dispatch," was arrested by Miller's private guards at an Anchorage school. The senate hopeful was on hand as part of a town hall event.  The firm that handles Miller's security says that Hopfinger shoved a man, but Hopfinger claims that he only pushed back at a guard after the guard began pushing him.  According to an article at the website for "Alaska Dispatch," Hopfinger was warned that he would be charged with trespassing if he did not cease asking questions and leave the premises:

"Hopfinger had been trying to ask Miller questions when two or three guards told him to leave or risk being charged with trespassing.  When Hopfinger continued to try to ask questions, one of the guards put the reporter in an arm-bar and then handcuffed him.  Hopfinger was released after police arrived.  The reporter was on public property where a public event was being held at the time of the incident."

The incident occurs one week after Miller, a Tea Party favorite who stunned incumbent Sen. Lisa Murkowski in the state's Republican Primary in August, abruptly announced that he would no longer answer questions from the press. "We've drawn a line in the sand. You can ask me about background, you can ask me about personal issues, I'm not going to answer them. I'm not," he said at the time.

Miller has recently faced accusations of an ethics breach. Last week, the former mayor of Fairbanks said that Miller nearly lost his job after a 2008 incident. Miller, Murkowski and Democratic nominee Scott McAdams are currently locked in a close three-way race for the seat.
Geezz Louise, these Republican/tea partiers have a lot of nerve don't they? They are lucky Hopfinger didn't have them arrested.  They think they are the law.  So typical.  I hope Hopfinger sues Miller for false imprisonment, violating his civil rights and whatever else will hold up in court.   

National Debt: Republican Hypocrisy

Republicans/tea partiers are screaming about the national debt.  Perhaps they should find this money first.  It is a crime that the Republicans got away with this.  How can we give these people the keys to the vault when they could not account for $2.3 trillion in one year alone?  And, how can they ask for the keys back with straight faces?  Because a sizable majority of American voters are lazy and uninformed, and would willingly go to their own slaughter if it is packaged right.  Anyway, here is a video with Rumsfeld's testimony about the missing money.  Looks like he was real concerned about the missing money.  Not! 

Friday, October 1, 2010

Another $1,000,000 from Fox to . . .

The New York Times reports:

The News Corporation, whose holdings include The Wall Street Journal and the Fox News Channel, has donated $1 million to the United States Chamber of Commerce, the business advocacy group that is among the heaviest anti-Democratic advertisers in this year’s elections.

The donation, first reported by The Politico last night and confirmed by a person with knowledge of the transaction, is News Corp.’s second known contribution to a group that is advertising heavily to support Republicans this year. In August, News Corp. confirmed that it had donated $1 million to the Republican Governors Association.
Must we still continue to treat Fox as if they were a legitimate news organization?

In Defense of Barack Obama

First, let me say that I did not support President Obama in the primary, but I did vote for him in the general election. So, I was not one of those starry-eyed Obama supporters. But I was so relieved when he was elected. Finally, a smart, analytical, well-spoken president! He is still all those things. Unfortunately, he has been under siege by the Republicans since day one and Obama was naive enough to believe he could obtain bi-partisan support on issues such as health care. I don't know why he was so naive about that, perhaps his inexperience. Anyway, the Republicans have manipulated the media brilliantly to cast doubt in the minds of the American people regarding almost every Obama proposal. They create controversy using false indignation and lies. They hide behind all of these little special interest groups, which are funded by conservative Republicans. The news media (except, of late, NBC's David Gregory) does not challenge any of the Republicans' misstatements of the facts, even the most outrageous ones. Thus, we are left with stories about people claiming that Obama was not born in the U.S., that Obama is a Muslim that Obama was going to take away all the guns that the health care reforms will result in death panels and people going to jail if they did not buy insurance. The news media did not do their own research on the health care reform bill. These were all unsubstantiated claims. It didn't matter that, 25 years ago, we would have recognized that the people making these claims were mentally unbalanced, lying or just plain stupid. Their friends and neighbors would have walked away, laughing and shaking their heads and ignored them. It never would have made it to the news. Instead, the news media treats these claims as "legitimate points of view" and gives these "fingers" a national forum from which to proselytize, thus legitimizing these groundless claims. Now, they are seeking office.

Then, there are the spineless and spin-less Democrats in Congress, who, with some exceptions, are scared of their own shadows. They deserted Obama on the health care reform bill and on the issue of the Bush tax cuts. They acted in pure self-interest, choosing to please corporate donors rather than improve the lives of their constituents. Instead of being out there on Meet the Press, Face the Nation or The Situation Room, enthusiastically and aggressively supporting the president's legislative proposals, they went into hiding. How is President Obama expected to pass any effective legislation without his own party spinning it?

Now, progressives, many of whom were those starry-eyed Obama supporters, are upset at Obama's performance because he hasn't done enough. The progressives are disappointed that he increased the troops and stepped up the fighting in Afghanistan. However, he said he was going to do this in many campaign speeches and during the debates. I was disappointed that he did not repeal the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy too, but I realize that Congress is filled with homophobes who are laden with testosterone. One can just do so much.

Let's review the good things President Obama has done: he picked Hillary Clinton for his Secretary of State; his Justice Department filed a brief urging the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act as discriminatory; he supported/passed/signed the health care reform bill, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the Small Business Jobs Act and Wall Street reform. He signed an Executive Order revoking President Bush’s Executive Order that limited federal funding of research involving human embryonic stem cells. President Obama's intelligence and demeanor immediately restored much of the international admiration and respect for this nation that had been corroded down to nothing under Bush.

Barack Obama has been President only twenty months. He came into office with his own agenda, but he has also had to contend with two wars and an economic crisis the extent of which this country had not seen in almost 80 years. During the primary and election season, I opined that many of the most ardent progressives had unrealistic expectations of Obama. Clearly, they did. Recall his words from his November 2008 victory speech:

This is your victory. And I know you didn't do this just to win an election. And I know you didn't do it for me. You did it because you understand the enormity of the task that lies ahead. For even as we celebrate tonight, we know the challenges that tomorrow will bring are the greatest of our lifetime -- two wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial crisis in a century. . . The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year or even in one term. . . There will be setbacks and false starts.
 To expect President Obama to solve all of the problems facing this nation in twenty short months, particularly considering the incredibly effective Republican interference, lies and propaganda machine, as well as the spineless, spin-less Democrats of the House and Senate, is unrealistic and unfair. This nation gave George Bush eight years to bring us to the eve of destruction. We should give President Obama more than twenty months to mop up Bush’s mess and we should support him in his efforts.

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Here We Go Again

The rise and fall of the spineless Democrats

An AP article reports that Congressional Democrats are wrestling "over whether to abandon President Barack Obama's tax cut plan" and that some House moderates are joining Republicans "in calling for an extension of Bush-era breaks for the wealthy as well as middle-income earners."  Say what??!!

Although "Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi remained solidly behind Obama's proposal to allow tax cuts for upper-income people to expire as scheduled at the end of the year",  leaders met behind closed doors today with "members concerned that voters would punish Democrats on Election Day if tax cuts are extended for some Americans, but not all." WTF?!

Please!!  This is why the Democrats got very little done during their first year and a half reigning over the House and Senate with a Democratic president. They are scared of their own shadows. They don't understand that the American people fully support extending the middle class tax cut and believe that the wealthy should pay more. Instead, they believe the Republicans' claim that the majority of Americans want a tax cut for the rich.  Huh?? The Democrats need to take a couple of lessons from the Republicans in party unity and in sticking to their guns. Come on people, do the right thing. Vote for Obama's bill.  Otherwise, you will lose control of Congress not because voters are mad at you for taxing the rich, but because you don't know how to lead like Democrats should lead.

Thursday, September 2, 2010

Fair and Balanced to the Tune of $1,000,000

I have Republican relatives. And, they are big fans of FOX "news".   While I have always been baffled by their political views, they have been shaking their heads and saying, "What's wrong with you?"  Thus, I suppose it is not surprising that my warnings about FOX "news" content have gone unheeded. They laugh at my claims of bias and my assertions that FOX just makes up the news as it suits Republican talking points.  They continue to watch FOX and rely on it as their primary source of news. There does not appear to be any critical thinking involved.

With the recent revelation that News Corporation, FOX "News' ''  parent company, recently donated an unprecedented $1 million to the Republican Governors Association, however, one can no longer deny reality: there is nothing fair and balanced about FOX "News" and there never has been.  I don't expect these people to stop watching FOX completely.  After all, it takes people of a certain bent to believe  what FOX shovels in the first place.  Nor do I expect them to suddenly become Facebook fans of Rachel Maddow.  Now that FOX has shown its true color (red), however, I just hope that they will look at FOX coverage with a more critical eye.  Perhaps they will consult with multiple sources for their news so that they can get "just the facts."   It's as easy as going online and reading the stories from the Associated Press, Reuters, Bloomberg, CNN, NY Times and the Washington Post.  I built my Google home page with feeds from a number of news organizations so that I can  see how each is treating the story.  Of  course, since FOX "News" made almost no mention of the contribution in their broadcasts, my Republican relatives and other FOX viewers may not even be aware of the contribution, despite the wide dissemination of the information by legitimate news outlets.  Damn!  Nevermind.

Saturday, August 28, 2010

The Tea Party

Brooklyn Beagle wants to remind readers that, historically, American tea parties have been a custom of the very rich High Society who liked to accompany their tea with fat desserts, expensive high-calorie mini sandwiches, and imported scones.

Yes, the tea party is for the rich and for little girls who like to pretend to be rich.

Howling,
Brooklyn Beagle

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

Thursday, August 5, 2010

Drug Cartels have Not Invaded

As I said in an earlier post, I have been watching the increase in drug cartel related violence in Mexico for the past couple of years and it is alarming.  I fear that it will spill over into this country.  But, as Rachel Maddow so eloquently points out-it has not happened yet!  Unfortunately, the Republicans would have us believe differently, spreading false stories and touting fake statistics to whip up the anti-immigration frenzy.  Watch this:

Tuesday, August 3, 2010

Beating Up On Babies


Now the Republicans are beating up on babies.

Senators Jeff Sessions (R. AL), Lindsey Graham (R. SC) and Mitch McConnell (R. Kentucky) want to revoke the birthright citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment which says if you're born here, you're a citizen - no matter what. Graham says "they" just come over here to "drop babies" meaning that Mexican pregnant women storm the border as soon as their water breaks to insure that their babies are born on U.S. soil and are born U.S. citizens. Graham claims that our forefathers didn't know that immigration would develop into such a problem and they didn't intend the birthright citizenship clause to be taken literally.

That's kind of funny because the Republicans claim that our forefathers clearly meant that the "right to bear arms" of the Second Amendment was indeed literal in all respects. We're shooting ourselves and each other every day over nothing and everything and clearly have let the violence get out of control. But the Republicans say tsk, tsk, the right to have a gun is in the constitution which, by the way, allows babies born here to illegal aliens to have guns, too.

Scary, really scary.

Howling,

Brooklyn Beagle



Saturday, July 31, 2010

Chelsea's Wedding

First of all, we don't know how much it's all costing – every dollar amount quoted for every item so far has been a blind guess published by the media which wouldn't get much attention if it said something like "The cake came from Target and cost $150 and Chelsea made her own dress out of old curtains from her grandmother's windows." That just isn't news. Of course, the media is exaggerating.

So if a few million bucks are spent on a lavish wedding, that's a few million bucks pumped into the coughing economy. Waiters, florists, cooks, valets, manicurists, hairdressers, cleaning staff, the local Starbucks — all of these people and businesses benefit. How many extra ice coffees and bottles of water and ice cream were sold to the hounding press camped out in town?

Bill and Hillary should spend a whopping wad on this wedding. The country needs it. Now . . . if they are not also paying for all the extra Secret Service protection, well, that's a different story. And that WOULD BE a story.

Howling,
Brooklyn Beagle

Thursday, July 29, 2010

The Mexico Situation



Over the past couple of years, I have been watching, with great interest and alarm, the increase in drug cartel related violence in Mexico. Most alarming is how brazen they are about it and how close to our border much of this is occurring. Killings of police and journalists are common, and gang members have resorted to barbaric tactics including decapitations and killing their enemies' relatives in hopes of intimidating opposition. They have armored vehicles, explosive devices and grenade launchers. Experts believe that the Gulf cartel and its former allies, the Zetas, are battling for trafficking routes in the northern border states and trying to get the military patrols out of the way.

 In Ciudad Juárez, Mexico, a border city located just across the river from El Paso, Texas, a drug cartel vowed to kill an officer every 48 hours until police chief Roberto Orduña Cruz, resigned. He initially refused to do so. On February 20, 2009, after the third murder of one of his officers, the chief resigned. The cartel also threatened to decapitate Ciudad Juárez' Mayor José Reyes Ferriz and his family unless he ended his efforts to clean up the corruption in the city's police department. The note told the mayor, who had homes in El Paso, Texas and Cuidad Juárez, that they were willing cross the border into the U.S. to kill them. Around the same time, gunmen shot at a car in Chihuahua Gov. José Reyes Baeza's motorcade, killing a bodyguard and wounding two agents. After these inccidents, the federal government took over the functions of police chief in Ciudad Juárez.


On July 1, 2010, there was a shootout between rival drug gangs on a deserted road between the villages of Tubutama and Saric, just 12 miles south of the U.S. (Arizona)-Mexican border, leaving 21 people dead and 6 wounded. Nearby Nogales, which is across the border from Nogales, Arizona, had 135 murders in 2009 and has had 131 murders so far this year.

In May 2009, a journalist from Torreón, in the state of Coahuila,which borders Texas was abducted and killed by kidnappers that investigators suspect were members of the Zetas drug gang. In January 2010, gunmen killed 10 young people in an attack in a bar Torreón.  In May 2010, eight young people were killed in an attack in another Torreón bar. Several of those who were killed were students and did not appear to have any links to drugs.  On Sunday, July 18, 2010, gunmen associated with a cartel burst into a birthday party and opened fire, killing at least 17 people.


On March 18 and 19, 2010, in Monterrey, Mexico, drug cartel members hijacked trucks and  buses, then used the vehicles to block four lane highways in an effort to disrupt army operations near the U.S.-Mexico border. Also in March 2010, gangs in the northeastern states of Nuevo Leon and Tamaulipas used automatic weapons and erected blockades at checkpoints to prevent soldiers from coming to the aid of soldiers already under attack.  


More recently, a drug gang actually used a car bomb in a planned attack on law enforcement. On July 16, 2010 the gang dressed a bound, wounded man in a police uniform and called in a false report of an officer shot. When the police arrived, the gang exploded a car killing the decoy, a rescue worker and two police officers.

Then there was the March 13, 2010 attack on the U.S. Consulate employees as they headed home to El Paso after attending a birthday party in Cuidad Juárez. Jesús Ernesto Chávez, leader of the Barrio Azteca organization, a violent gang originating in Texas prisons with members on both sides of the border and which supplies contract killers to the Juarez drug cartel, was arrested for masterminding the killings of U.S. Consulate staffer Lesley Ann Enriquez and her husband. 


There are many other incidents involving mass executions, shootouts between rival gangs, shootouts between gangs and the police, discoveries of mass graves and reports of gangs entering weddings and parties to kill or kidnap people. Almost 25,000 people have been killed in drug-related violence since President Felipe Calderón took office at the end of 2006. This violence could easily spill over into the U.S. and is a very dangerous threat to our national security. It appears that simply cracking down on drug cartels will not work, as much of this violence started when Mexico's president began doing just that. The U.S. has poured $1.6 billion into Mexico's efforts to stop the activity. The cartels have infiltrated every level of the Mexican government and there are allegations that the Ms. Enriquez, the U.S. Consulate staffer murdered in Cuidad Juárez, may have been compromised. We are sending 1200 National Guard troops to help patrol the border with the dual purpose of curbing illegal immigration and drug trafficking. But that is not enough. We need to do two additional things:


1. Use unmanned drone aircraft to patrol the borders. This will help the Border Patrol and National Guard locate the smugglers quickly.
2. Take the profit motive out of smuggling marijuana by legalizing it. Our experience during prohibition taught us that banning alcohol created a black market for the product and resulted in the growth of gangs and violence. The government can also then tax it and add to our revenue.

How shall we pay for this? As noted,the tax on marijuana sales will help pay for it, as will the restored revenue from the Bush tax cuts, which are scheduled to sunset soon. Using the restored revenue for this purpose is an investment in the security of our country and our way of life.

Monday, July 26, 2010

I Miss Ted Koppel

I do.  I miss Ted Koppel.  I loved the way he would stop the guest in the middle of a totally non-responsive answer, call attention to the fact that a guest was not answering his question and repeat the question several times until the guest answered.  He held their feet to the fire.  Since Ted retired, I have spent too much time heckling my t.v. set during news shows as the reporter or host allowed the guest to weasel around a question and instead use it as an opportunity to propagandize.  No one presses these people anymore.  Everyone is afraid of confrontation, afraid to call these people on their crap.   So, it gave me great pleasure to watch David Gregory do a Ted Koppel with NRCC chairman Pete Sessions on Sunday's Meet the Press.  Watch the video below.  Its fun.

Friday, July 16, 2010

WELL SAID !

Why GOP Is Not the Answer

Mitchell Bard said it well on his blog today over at Huffington Post:
"As the partisan cable networks breathlessly discuss what will happen in the midterm elections in November, there is much talk about how Americans are angry and, as a result, the Republicans are set for major gains in Congress. But the connection between these two assertions -- Americans' dissatisfaction and GOP success -- strikes me as incredibly lazy, both by the media and the voters. 

Nowhere is this disconnect more clear than in the financial regulation battle, which finally concluded with a bill passing the Senate yesterday.

Americans have every right to be angry. Oil has been spewing into the Gulf of Mexico for nearly three months (hopefully, it's finally been contained). Islamic extremists seek to kill Americans. We have such a muddy immigration situation, that, no matter which side of the ideological fence you sit on (pun intended), you can't be happy with the way things currently operate.

But the main point of anger is the economy. The official unemployment rate is hovering around 10 percent (with millions more not counted because they've given up on looking for a job). People are concerned about their ability to pay their bills and see an unfair system that rewards Wall Street's reckless risks while punishing middle class workers.

But if Americans want to assess blame for these woes, and if they want to choose who should help get us out of these messes, they have an obligation in a democracy to make an effort to really look at the issues before making a decision. And the media, likewise, has an obligation to sort through these complicated issues more carefully.

If the Republican campaign message for 2010 was something like, "Yes, we know that we caused all these problems in the Bush years, but we've learned our lesson, and now we are offering these new ideas to fix things in the future," I would understand (if not agree with) the equating of the problems with Republican gains. But that's not what the Republicans are offering. Rather, the GOP campaign message for 2010 is essentially the same message as the Bush years, only more militant (and more wacky, thanks to the Angle-Paul tea party influence). Their pitch is built around deregulation, lower taxes for the rich, and less government, the very things that got us into this mess in the first place.

The Republican congressional record for the Obama years consists of opposing any initiative the president offered (in an effort to make him look ineffectual), even if he proposed something the GOP itself had supported earlier, and to offer as solutions the same tired policies from the Bush years (tax cuts, even if they add to the deficit, as Sen. Jon Kyl suggested). That shouldn't be a winning election argument. But with incendiary rhetoric and right-wing-propaganda-machine-fueled lies taking center stage, the focus for the midterms hasn't been on the facts (how we got here and what the two parties have offered since). 

In fact, the Republicans have been at the heart of the causes of these problems, and they have offered little other than the same policies as solutions.

Which brings us back to financial regulation, an issue directly tied to the current economic problems. We did not magically morph from prosperity to recession. Rather, the current recession and massive job loss began with the near collapse of the financial system in 2008. Wall Street played a win-lose game (they won no matter what, but we all lost) with risky financial instruments. The housing market collapsed under the weight of subprime mortgages. So the deregulation trumpeted by Republicans caused this mess, and yet the party still touts deregulation. 

Certainly, Americans should be angry. And it would seem obvious that action was needed. Nevertheless, all but three Republicans in the Senate didn't think so. Given a choice of standing with the banks or the American people, the Republicans announced their allegiance loud and clear: It is the party of the financial institutions. 
So what is the Republican solution to our economic woes? Based on the actions of their leaders, it seems to be to blame the victims, cut taxes and protect the banks. Not only have Republicans opposed extending unemployment benefits, they have tried to blame the unemployed for their plight, particularly cruel since it was their policies that put them out of work in the first place. Arthur Delaney pointed out two examples in HuffPost last week: Sen. John Kyl said unemployment benefits provide a disincentive for the unemployed to seek work, and Sen. Judd Gregg claimed that unemployment insurance encourages the unemployed to stay out of work. (Again, Kyl won't support adding to the deficit for unemployment insurance, but he is fine with doing so for tax cuts for the wealthy.) 

Republicans have used increasing government debt as a pro-GOP argument. Generally, it is, of course, better for the government not to run large deficits. But the Republican argument ignores history and is overly simplistic. After all, Bill Clinton handed a surplus to George W. Bush, who proceeded to leave Obama with a gaping deficit. Republicans were happy to run up debt in the 2000s on tax cuts for the rich and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, none of which were paid for. But now that the tens of millions of Americans face unemployment, these same GOP leaders complain about the deficit and say we can't afford any programs to help. How is it that we could afford to spend when it was for tax cuts (and still can, according to Kyl), but not to help those hurt by the Republican-policy-induced recession? 

Two polls released on Tuesday showed that Americans care more about unemployment than the deficit. Which party is more concerned with each of those issues? So why should the anger translate to GOP votes? It shouldn't. 

In general, Republican policies precipitated the recession, and the party's solutions are to offer more of the same. And when it came to deciding who to stand up for, the Republicans attacked the unemployed and stood with the banks. Americans' anger is legitimate, but directing that anger by giving power back to the GOP is misplaced. The connection makes no sense. 

(You could run the same arguments for the oil disaster, immigration and terrorism, showing the Republican culpability and the lack of new solutions offered by the GOP to address the problems.)

I harbor no illusions that Obama and the Democratic Congress are above critique. But I'm saddened that there seems to be no recognition that most of the messes we find ourselves in were created, by and large, by the policies instituted by Bush and his Republican allies in Congress, and that the Republicans are offering those very same policies as the solution in the current campaign. It seems to me handing the reins back to the people who created the problems in the first place (and, more importantly, are only offering more of the same) is a horrible way to respond to the challenges. I'm further saddened that GOP strategy of obstructing and lying, putting rhetoric in front of facts, seems to be working.

You would think that with an oil disaster ravaging his state's already hurting economy, Sen. David Vitter would have better things to do than vote against financial reform and endorse bogus "birther" lawsuits against the president. But this is the essence of the Republican party in 2010."
Thank you, Mr. Bard.

Sunday, May 23, 2010

Outrageous Republican Statements 5/23/2010

Tea Party leader Mark Williams on the plans to build a 13-story mosque and Islamic cultural center near ground zero: "The monument would consist of a Mosque for the worship of the terrorists' monkey-god."  After it was pointed out to Mark Williams that his comment was not only offensive, but incorrect as it is Hindus who worship Hanuman, the Monkey God,apologized to "my Hindu friends" and acknowledged that Hanuman was "worshipped as a symbol of perseverance, strength and devotion." No apology to Muslims, however.

Tuesday, May 18, 2010

Of Local (Portland) Interest

Check out Dan Rather's piece on child prostitution in Portland, Oregon (at Huffington Post.)  

Friday, May 7, 2010

Outrageous Republican Statements-5/7/2010

Limbaugh's Lies
On his May 4 program, Rush Limbaugh said: "Guess what? Faisal Shahzad is a registered Democrat. I wonder if this SUV had an Obama sticker on it. Faisal Shahzad is a registered Democrat."

Faisal Shahzad is not even a registered voter, let alone a registered democrat.

Thursday, May 6, 2010

Joe Lieberman Furthers bin Laden's Cause

I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed.  The U.S. government will lead the American people in -- and the West in general -- into an unbearable hell and a choking life.
Osama bin Laden, October 2001 interview with Al-Jazeera.  
Innocent until proven guilty has long been a one of those coveted rights.  "The principle that there is a presumption of innocence in favor of the accused is the undoubted law, axiomatic and elementary, and its enforcement lies at the foundation of the administration of our criminal law."  Coffin v. United States, 156 U.S. 432 (1895).  Joe Lieberman wants to change that.  Lieberman wants to strip citizens of their citizenship for associating with alleged terrorists before the citizens are even tried and convicted.  Lieberman hopes that in doing so, the government would not be required to advise American citizens suspected of associating with alleged terrorists of the Miranda warning and could then deny them their constitutional rights to consult an attorney, to remain silent, to a speedy trial, etc. This would effectively result in convictions of Americans for heinous crimes by unfair trials based on illegally obtained evidence.  The mere suggestion of such a law shows just how little Joe Lieberman values the freedoms and principles that have made America a truly great country.  The warrantless surveillance of telephone communications by the NSA, the "Patriot Act", now this. Is bin Laden getting what he wants?

Wednesday, May 5, 2010

Manufacturing the News

And it ain't just FOX!
I have long been suspicious that the mainstream media  was creating false controversy where none existed.  When they state, "Some people are saying . . ." without any identifying information about their sources, I always wonder if the "some people" were fictitious, created in some media producer's office in an effort to boost ratings or circulation.  Well, Eric Boehlert from Media Matters caught them in the act:   

(I)t was mostly the mainstream media that concocted the absurd "Obama's Katrina" claim in the first place, and then helped actively push it. Journalists did it by pointing to mostly faceless, imaginary "critics" of the Obama administration in order to float the phony storyline.

Reporters and pundits last week couldn't find independent experts on disaster or emergency response who criticized the government's actions in the Gulf of Mexico. Reporters and pundits couldn't even find Republican members of Congress to blast Obama and his team. So instead, the press just decided to do that on its own and pretend it was news.
. . .
(A)fter going back and looking at more of the coverage of the politics of the oil spill, it's now clear that in this disturbing case it was the Beltway press that hatched the bogus "Obama's Katrina" meme, and then served up on a platter to the appreciative Noise Machine, which happily amplified it. In this instance, the sloppy misinformation campaign was concocted not by feral, Obama Derangement Syndrome bloggers, but by corporate journalists working from some of the biggest names in the news business; New York Times, the AP, ABC and CBS.
Journalists had virtually no factual foundation upon which to build the "Obama's Katrina" story. But that didn't seem to stop many.

It was the Associated Press that helped kick off the misguided "Obama's Katrina" talking point with a spin-heavy report by Calvin Woodward, which hit the news wire on the night of April 29. The article rather breathlessly suggested there would be all kinds of dire political consequences for the White House (not the oil industry) because many more millions of gallons of oil were spilling into the ocean than previous believed [emphasis added]:

Did you notice the nifty trick? The AP couldn't point to anyone of importance who had actually raised serious questions about self-policing. But the AP was confident somebody would, so the AP included that claim in a news article.

That speculation-as-news approach then allowed the AP's Woodward -- based on no actual reporting -- to wonder out loud, "Will this be Obama's Katrina?" Keep in mind, nobody quoted or mentioned in the article ever raised the Katrina specter. That was introduced by the AP, and the AP alone. So with the help of the AP, the "Obama's Katrina" ball began to roll.


A few hours later on the night of April 29, the Washington Times published an article by Joseph Curl, which leaned hard on the Katrina angle:
But like the AP, Curl and the Times couldn't actually point to anybody who was making that connection with the oil spill. In fact, nowhere in the Times article were any Obama aides seen defending the oil spill response to forestall Katrina comparisons, for the simple reasons that nobody was making those comparisons.
 
Now questions are sure to be raised about a self-policing system that trusted a commercial operator to take care of its own mishap.
The rapidly expanding environmental catastrophe caused by the oil spill off the coast of Louisiana is presenting a growing political challenge to the Obama White House, with Mr. Obama and his aides at pains to defend the response and forestall comparisons to the Hurricane Katrina crisis.
It probably shouldn't have to be noted, but I'll do it here anyway: Journalists are supposed to be in the business of reporting news, not manufacturing it. But in this case, the "Obama's Katrina" angle appeared to be too alluring for journalists to ignore and to not manufacture. The next morning, on Friday, on ABC's Good Morning America, George Stephanopoulos interviewed Obama advisor David Axelrod and launched the Katrina meme into the big time: "Here's this morning's Associated Press: 'Will this be Obama's Katrina?' Should the federal and state governments have done more and earlier?" 

That question then became the news. Meaning, the fact that the White House was now being asked to defend the "Obama's Katrina" comparison (a comparison that nobody besides journalists were actually making at that time), meant that the 'story' had entered the media bloodstream and that it was now completely legitimate to raise questions about something that nobody was actually saying. (Limbaugh followed Stephanopoulos' lead and began pushing the "Obama's Katrina last Friday.) 


For example, here was the Los Angeles Times on May 1, one day after Stephanopoulos asked about "Obama's Katrina" on ABC: Slight problem: The Times article did not include any criticism that federal agencies had acted too slowly. None. So if the Times couldn't find any relevant officials making a connection to Katrina, why did the Times feel it was okay to make that connection on its own?

That same day, this New York Times headline was quite clear:  "Shadow of Hurricane Katrina Hangs Over Obama After Spill."  By whose estimate did the "shadow of Hurricane Katrina" suddenly hang over the oil spill? Answer: By the New York Times' own estimation, of course. Because nobody in the article ever mentioned Katrina. The best the daily could do was point to faceless "critics": "The fact that Mr. Obama has no plans to visit the Gulf Coast in the next few days has already raised the eyebrows of some administration critics, in particular as it relates to the president's plans this weekend."  The Times then promptly failed to quote a single administration "critic" making that claim.

Criticism of the federal agencies as too slow to recognize the seriousness of the spill reflects the difficult balancing act faced by the Obama administration as it increasingly takes ownership of disaster response in a region still angry over the Bush administration's reaction to Hurricane Katrina in 2005. 
Boehlert goes on to quote the Christian Science Monitor, Jake Tapper of ABC News and Katie Couric of CBS News "reporting" the same story using the "some people" reference without any identifying information or indication that "some people" really existed.  There is more to read in Boehlert's piece.  Click here to read the entire column.

Tuesday, May 4, 2010

The Charges

Click here to see the charges against Faisal Shahzad, the Times Square car bomber.  It sets forth details of the investigation and evidence supporting probable cause to arrest Faisal Shahzad.

Sunday, May 2, 2010

If Employers Don't Hire, They Won't Come

The flood of illegal aliens into this country is problematic. It drives down wages and contributes to a higher unemployment rate for Americans and legal immigrants. However, the new Arizona "Papers Please" law is unconstitutional and downright un-American. It will clog the criminal courts and take the police away from other more essential enforcement duties. Erecting a fence along the 1969 mile US-Mexico border is not likely to be effective, unless we put up a Berlin-type concrete wall and put guards along its entire length. Such an undertaking is unrealistic and just plain creepy.

We have laws on the books to prevent illegal immigration. The federal Immigration and Nationalization Act provides for the imposition of monetary penalties between $250 and $10,000 per alien against an employer who hires them. The federal government should add staff as required to enforce this provision and raise the penalties to cover the actual costs of enforcement and make it more expensive for them to hire illegal workers than legal workers. We have been letting the employers get away with breaking the law at the expense of everyone else for too long.

Lance Orton: Reluctant Hero

   
Americans, and particularly New Yorkers, owe a big debt of gratitude to Lance Orton, the t-shirt vendor who observed and reported the car bomb in Times Square last evening.  Excellent job, Lance!! 

Friday, April 30, 2010

Thank you Harry Reid!

I have been very critical of Senate Majority  Leader Harry Reid's lack of backbone due to his failure to stand up to the Republicans and or to use his pulpit to push through legislation. Well, this week, Senate Democrats led by Harry Reid stood up to Republicans in a big way. After weeks of Republicans blocking the Wall Street reform bill, Majority Leader Reid called their bluff by threatening to require votes throughout the night so the filibustering senators could not go home. He also called them on their obstructionism and exposed them for siding with the big banks by making statements to the press such as: 
  • "The games of stalling are over";
  • "All the talk by Republicans about wanting to do something about this bill before it gets on the floor is really anti-Senate, anti-American.  It appears they're more concerned about taking care of the fat cats on Wall Street"; 
  • When asked about the finance bill and the moderate Republicans, he replied, "There aren't any.."  
and he won!  MoveOn.org is circulating a thank you card.  As they said, it would have been easy to give in, cut a deal and weaken reform. But this time, Senator Reid and the Democrats did the right thing, and we should thank them. I signed this 'Thank You' card.  Please take a minute, click on the link below and sign the card!
http://pol.moveon.org/thanksreiddems/?r_by=20102-4265401-T2eVwVx&rc=paste

Thursday, April 29, 2010

Outrageous Republican Statements 4/29/2010: Microchip 'em!

Dr. Pat BertrocheI, who is running for an Iowa Republican Congressional seat, told an audience regarding illegal immigrants: "I think we should catch 'em, we should document 'em, make sure we know where they are and where they are going.  I actually support microchipping them. I can microchip my dog so I can find it. Why can't I microchip an illegal?"

New Feature: Outrageous Republican Statements

Also known as ORS, this is a new feature that will likely appear frequently but not at regularly scheduled intervals.  I will bring to your attention false, ignorant, scary and/or ridiculous statements made by Republicans that need little or no commentary.  We know there are many.  I hope this is fun!

Friday, April 23, 2010

Arizona Has History of Racist Legislation

In 1986, the Arizona state legislature rejected efforts to establish Martin Luther King, Jr. Day as a holiday.  That same year, Governor Bruce Babbitt declared MLK day a holiday.  In 1987, Arizona had a new governor, Evan Mecham, who rescinded Governor Babbitt's declaration.  In 1989, the state legislature finally passed legislation establishing the holiday, but it was subsequently rejected by voters via  ballot measure.  It wasn't until after the NFL voted to pull the 1993 Super Bowl from Tempe, Arizona and award it to Pasadena that Arizona voters approved the holiday. 

Monday, April 19, 2010

Sarah Palin over-brewed

Brooklyn Beagle thinks that we've all been listening to Sarah Palin and her tea partiers Oolong. And as every tea-degreed citizen knows, over-brewed tea not only tastes bitter, it is harmful to the health.

Howling,
Brooklyn Beagle

Rachel Maddow's Special on The McVeigh Tapes

On this, the 15th anniversary of the bombing of the Federal building in Oklahoma City, Rachel Maddow has a special that airs at 9:00 p.m. eastern time/6:00 p.m. pacific time tonight on MSNBC, "The McVeigh Tapes: Confessions of an American Terrorist."  According to Hank Stuever's Washington Post review, it is quite chilling.  It is probably worth watching, particularly in light of the current anti-government hoo-ha.

Sunday, April 18, 2010

Where's the beef?

Tantrums by angry white men
Okay, so they aren't all men.  But, last week's New York Times/CBS poll was quite telling.  As it turns out, tea partiers are wealthier and better educated than the general public.  And, regardless of their signs and slogans, they think that the amount of taxes they paid last year was fair.  So, what's their real beef?  They are simply racists who are angry that we have a black president.*    Nevermind that his IQ is higher than everyone in the Republican party put together.  Forget that he can actually construct a sentence, read, think and has the respect of world leaders, unlike gee dubya.   

*According to the NY Times/CBS poll, Tea Party supporters are convinced that:
   • the policies of the Obama administration are disproportionately directed at helping the poor rather than the middle class or the rich;
   • that President Obama does not share the values most Americans live by;
   • that he does not understand the problems of people like themselves. "More than half say the policies of the administration favor the poor, and 25 percent think that the administration favors blacks over whites — compared with 11 percent of the general public.
   • Tea partiers are more likely than the general public, and Republicans, to say that too much has been made of the problems facing black people.

Absence

My conspicuous absence for the last several months was due to health problems and long periods of hospitalization.   But, the pundit is BACK and ready to pundicize!   

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Cheney Welcomes Terrorist Attacks

The day after Christmas, I said to my spouse, "I wonder how long it will take Dick Cheney to start spouting off and blaming President Obama for the attempted attack" on the jet over Detroit on Christmas Day. Cheney has been all over the airwaves predicting a terror attack and pre-judging it as Obama's fault since before President Obama took office. As time went on, as did his doom and gloom appearances in the media, it became increasingly clear that Dick Cheney hopes that terrorists attack this nation.

(Written January 4, 2010)