TheBlueDonkey.com

The Business of Government

2012-02-15T05:43:00.001-08:00

"We’re broke.” “We currently borrow 40 cents on every dollar we spend.” We hear this time and time again from the right. Mitt Romney claims that as a businessman, he will be able to treat the deficit and economy like a business, and make the severe cuts he proposes. The cuts he’s talking about, by the way, would be 35% across the board on all social programs, while putting hundreds of thousands of dollars more in the pockets of the Über-rich with his tax plan. Those making less then $200,000.00 will see their taxes increase. Those in abject poverty, who currently earn so little as to not qualify to pay taxes, will start paying taxes. Not sure how a family of four, starving on $12,000 a year, is supposed to find that money to pay the tax, but there it is.

So what America needs is to have the government run like a business. Or at least that’s what we keep hearing. When the business is making no profit, they cut costs. That makes sense to me. But if a business were struggling, and borrowing forty cents on the dollar to stay afloat, would you just stand by and reduce your costs to match your current income? Or would you also try to raise revenue by striving to increase sales and market share at the same time?

That’s all the Democrats want- a two-pronged approach. They’re in absolute agreement that spending must be curtailed, but they are also realistic enough to understand that revenue must be generated as well. It tough times a businessman doesn’t resign himself to his business failing and waits for an inevitable end, he/she generates new business to offset the business the company has lost.

"Job Creators"

2011-10-05T11:56:00.000-07:00

The idea that the über-rich are this country’s job creators is sheer nonsense. The idea that raising taxes on these people will keep jobs being created is nonsense. If that were the case then after years of the Bush tax cuts we should have the greatest economy that this country has ever seen. Instead, we have the worst economy since the Great Depression. No “job creator” will ever create a job without a demand for a good or service. Put it in the pockets of multimillionaires and they might buy one more house, or one more yacht, or car. It will not create the demand for goods this country needs to put people back to work. Put more money in the pockets of middle and lower class families who will spend that money and you’ll create that demand.

I ask you, how much money do the rich corporate CEO’s need? How many millions, how many billions is enough for these people? Is there no limit to their greed? How much money does it take for them to live comfortably? How many houses can you own? How many yachts do you need? How many cars? John McCain couldn’t recall how many houses he owned when asked in the 2008 presidential campaign. I'm sure many of you wish you had that problem, I do. During the Bush administration we witnessed the greatest amassing of wealth in our history, but also the greatest increase in poverty.

Middle and lower class Americans are tired of hearing that everyone in this country has the same opportunity to achieve wealth and status. That’s a fairy tale. Your chance of becoming a multimillionaire through hard work and perseverance is less than winning the lottery. Becoming incredibly wealthy takes several factors coming together. Yes, hard work is one. But also luck,as well as being in the right place at the right time. Another major factor are connections. Newt Gingrich is a multimillionaire now due to his political connections made during his time as Speaker of the House. They want you to believe that an inner city African American child has the same chance as the Koch Brothers and Donald Trump, both of whom inherited wealth. Does anyone really believe that a youth from a Philadelphia housing project has the same chance as the children of millionaire and billionaire parents? Does anyone believe they have access to the same education in private schools and Ivy League Universities?

About the only area that we are equal to the richest Americans is with our right to vote. But that is no longer the level playing field it was, and multi-billion dollar corporations are working right now with Republican lawmakers to take that opportunity away from many Americans, through new voter registration requirements that are designed to disenfranchise minorities and the poor. Thye use the excuse that these strict requirements are necessary to prevent voter fraud. Well, here's a fact: between 2001 and 2007 there were more people killed by lightning strikes than proven cases of voter fraud. The real fraud is being perpetrated by Republican lawmakers on the voters they hope to eliminate from the electoral rolls. Fortunately, The courts have blocked some of these new laws from going through, but if they eventually succeed in this endeavor then all is lost. The moment one segment of society is prevented from voting we cease to have a representative government. Give republicans another four years and imagine the damage they can do. Unions gone. Americans denied the right to vote. And inequalities in income that will further increase the wealth of the richest Americans while forcing more families than ever into poverty. We will become a nation of two classes- Rich and poor- and the poor, by design, will have no voice.

This is now the most important election of our lives. We stand on the precipice of losing the representative government we are entitled to, that is, a government of the people, by the people and FOR the people, or having a government of the rich, by the rich and for the rich.

I know Americans are disgusted with our congress and they have every right to be. A representative government was lost the day it became a road to wealth. But nonetheless, venting our anger by voting for anyone but the incumbent is not the answer. That’s what put the obstructionist Tea Party candidates in power, resulting in absolute gridlock in Washington.

Our greatest chance at a representative government, a government for the people, rests with you. Our best chance at rebuilding this economy by investing in infrastructure rests with you. Our best chance of leaving any sort of legacy for our children rests with you. Our best chance of living the American Dream rests with you. It is imperative that we shift the balance of power by keeping a Democrat in the White House and giving the House and Senate a large Democratic majority. If we don’t do this in 2012 it will be too late.

LEAVE IT TO BEAVERTOWN

2011-10-04T17:41:00.000-07:00

The Utopian Society envisioned by the Christian Right.

Bill White awoke to find the sun streaming through the bedroom window of his modest 4-bedroom suburban home. The smell of eggs and bacon floated in the air. He climbed out of his striped pajamas and into the shower. He shaved, brushed his teeth, and dressed in blue slacks, white shirt and a conservative tie and headed downstairs to the kitchen. There he found his wife Susan at the stove preparing pancakes. She was dressed in a fine dress that reached her knees. Her hair and makeup were perfect. Bill gave his wife a brief kiss and a “good morning” and sat down at his usual place at the head of the kitchen table. Children Billy and Jane galloped in and sat at their customary chairs. Billy’s red hair was cut short and he was dressed in slacks, white shirt and tie. Older sister Jane wore the dark green skirt and crisp white shirt that were required by the kid’s school. After a proper greeting to their parents Susan began to distribute the eggs, bacon and pancakes she prepared. Only after seeing that everyone else’s needs were filled did she sit down to eat her own breakfast. At ten minutes before 8:00 Bill and the children headed out to the white, four-door sedan that sat in the driveway of the manicured lawn, but not without first taking their brown-bagged lunches that had been prepared by Susan earlier that morning. As he walked down the path to his car he saw his next-door neighbor, George Smith and his children Betty and Jim, doing the same thing.
“Good morning, George.”
“Good morning, Bill.”
The children climbed in the car, not saying a word as Bill White drove the two miles to the school operated by the Heartland Mega-Church as he did every weekday morning. Only after their father told them to have a good day did they speak. “Thanks, Dad” they said as they clamored out of the Chevrolet. Bill White then headed off to his job as an accountant for a Fortune 500 company. While the kids were in school Susan would head off to the local market to pick up food for the dinner she would prepare that evening. Following a quiet dinner that evening, several couples from the Heartland Mega-Church arrived for the prayer group the Whites hosted each Monday night. Following two-hours of prayer and small talk, the White family went to bed. This routine repeated itself daily except that the prayer group might be held at another families’ home.

This Ward and June Cleaver existence is just what evangelical Christians desire. This is the utopian society they envision. A world where the husband is the clear head of the household, wives are reduced to a support role and subservience to their spouses and the children don’t speak until spoken to. A place where the local super-church is the predominant force in society and communities are molded to fit a preconceived notion of “normalcy.” The local pastor interprets the Bible for the congregation and any questioning the faith are quickly and efficiently quashed. The super-church extends it’s reach by “suggesting” that faithful members of the church will hold prayer groups and attend Bible Studies. Ministries are established for counseling and engaging couples, singles, men, women, seniors teens and children all in an effort to keep any resident of our imaginary Beavertown from straying from “The Faith.”

On a national level, the first act after election of an evangelical president and conservative branches of government will be to write an amendment to the constitution striking the separation of church and state line.

Immigration will be strictly enforced and a wall will be constructed between the United States and Mexico.

Anyone caught in homosexual activity will be arrested, but “rehabilitated” in prison by undergoing heavy-duty pray-away-the-gay types of programs.

Birth control will be frowned upon, if not made illegal, with the idea of expanding the Christian flock exponentially. Abortions would result in imprisonment for the woman and the physician. Abstinence will be taught in school, church and ministries.

Pornography will be made illegal, and anyone found in possession of it will be forced to undergo counseling through the church to “cure” them of their addiction. Television shows will be the equivalent of early shows like I Love Lucy or The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet, and of course, Leave it to Beaver. Films will resemble the types made by Disney. There will be no PG, R, or X ratings. All movies will be of the G type and will no longer need rating.

Now that may sound like a very rosy outlook to Christians, but they are ignoring the downside of their actions.

Removing the separation of church and state clause will result in Mosques being made unconstitutional and torn down. Muslim Americans will be asked to convert to Christianity or leave the country, with the preference on the latter. At the very least they will find themselves ostracized. While going through security at the airport they will be directed to a dedicated line for anyone that looks to be of Arab descent.

Regarding immigration, the wall they so desire will cost in the billions of dollars and will be a constant drain on the budget in staffing it with armed border patrols in sufficient amounts to keep anyone from crossing and making repairs to it. Immigrant families with firm roots in the United States will be uprooted and dropped off on the Mexican side of the wall with just the clothes on their backs.

With homosexuality, rather than eliminating it as they believe they will do with their policies, will only force it underground, where STD’s, often left untreated, will be able to flourish.

Taking away a woman’s right to abortion and eliminating all birth control will serve only to drive women to seek illegal abortions in alleys and other unsterile environments. Forcing women to keep these unwanted children will cause a great deal of hardship as welfare will have long been abolished. These unwed mothers may be able to survive with the help of charities, but doing so would require they agree to the teachings and lifestyle approved by the church as they will be the only charities sanctioned. Battered women’s shelters will be church-run, advising women to return to their abusive husbands and try to remember their subservient role, even suggesting that they deserved their abuse by clashing with their husbands.

The ban on pornography will of course lead to censorship, so works of art deemed to racy to hang in museums will either be hidden away or destroyed. Books, paintings, music and other forms of media will have to be approved by a government commission before being displayed or distributed. If this fails to work then government agencies will be generated to actually create films, music and television programs that promote the Christian lifestyle.

This may all sound extreme, but it could happen. There are powerful forces out there that want a country like this. They are well organized and good at getting their message out. They are working at stealing elections through outrageous voter registration laws and redistricting. They have the power and money of major corporations and lobbyists behind them as these corporations share many of the same conservative goals. Much like they support the Tea Party movement. Individual freedom is the last thing Evangelicals want. They want a Crist-centered world that they believe will be free of imperfections.

The Tea Party: Compassionless Conservatives?

2011-09-23T16:08:00.000-07:00

The Tea Party:
Compassionless Conservatives?

Compassionate Conservatism has long been a hallmark of the Republican party. Personally, my feeling has always been that their compassion only extended to those that held their same belief system. But the Tea Party has revealed itself to be chock full of compassionless conservatives.

Take the recent Republican debates for instance. When Governor Rick Perry bragged of his record of two-hundred ninety some executions the crowd cheered. When Ron Paul was asked what the fate of a comatose 30 year-old without health insurance should be, many in the crowd yelled “Let him die.” In the most recent debate, a question was asked by a gay serviceman who is currently serving in Afghanistan. Many in the debate audience booed the soldier.

I wonder what a country ruled by the Tea Party would be like. We can assume billions of dollars would be spent to erect a wall or fence along our southern border. That fence would be patrolled by armed border patrols with instructions to shoot anyone that tries to enter the US illegally. Laws would be passed to allow law enforcement to stop anyone suspected of being an illegal and require they provide proof of their citizenship. Those caught here illegally would be gathered up, along with their wives and children, many of whom have firm roots here in the states and dropped off at the border with only the clothes on their backs.

At our airports, anyone with arab features would be plucked from line and subjected to thorough searches. When the terrorists adjust their methods and begin using little old white-haired ladies to smuggle explosives or weapons on board, then they’ll be added to the list of those requiring full body cavity searches. Of course, Tea Partiers may prefer the Ron Paul approach and do away with the TSA and make it the responsibility of the airlines to take care of our security. After all, that worked so well on Wall Street when it was policing itself. I wonder, will the airlines priority be safety or the bottom line?

The Tea Party wants the government out of Americans lives. Well, almost. Tea Party Republicans elected in 2010 have been responsible for a swath of anti-abortion legislation and moves to destroy of unions. So the government should be out of your life with the exceptions of telling women what they can do with their bodies and a citizen’s right to organize and negotiate for better pay and working conditions.

Major cuts would be made to Medicare, Social Security, Welfare and unemployment benefits, if not privatization or ending them all together. The Tea Party believes it’s up to the individual to pay their own way for health care and if you haven’t got the money to do so amidst escalating health care costs, well, better they should die and help decrease the surplus population. The Tea Party believes that it’s up to the individual to take care of their own financial future by investing their money in a self-regulated Wall Street. How can you go wrong with that plan? Wall Street commits the same sort of fraud and abuse as it did leading up to 2008’s near-depression and if you’ve done as the Tea Partiers suggest and sunk your savings into that black hole well, that’s just tough luck. Do them a favor and try not to die on a busy street- you’ll create a traffic jam. As for unemployment compensation, better to simply do away with it. Anyone not working is just lazy and doesn’t want to work. Same with those Welfare Queens.

Now speaking of traffic, I wonder what traffic might be like under a Michelle Bachmann administration after she does away with all income taxes as she suggested in the most recent debate. How will cities pay for traffic lights and infrastructure like road and bridge repairs? Would the country even have a police force or military? How would she fund law-enforcement on women trying to get abortions and workers trying to create unions?How would she even get paid? You have to wonder.

Barack Obama-Republican

2011-09-16T15:23:00.000-07:00

The minute President Obama agreed to extend the Bush tax cuts he became a Republican. Obama is basically continuing the Bush economic policy. A policy that failed, and failed miserably and a policy that can only make our situation worse. Obama claimed he extended those cuts to protect middle-class tax cuts. I think we all would have been better served to lose our cuts if it meant putting an immediate end to the Bush economic policy.
In spite of the fact that Americans sided with him, our President still allowed Republicans to turn the debt ceiling into a financial crisis and a bargaining chip. I thought Obama should have raised the ceiling himself, citing the constitution’s words that say "The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law…shall not be questioned" That was good enough for me and would have sufficed for many Democrats and Independents. Had the President made this move he would have been seen as decisive, strong, and as the adult in the room. Instead he allowed himself to be pulled into the republican’s game and further injured himself by demanding a tax increase on the wealthiest Americans and then gave up that position.

Now the President has come up with his aggressive jobs bill. He explains that there are things in his bill the Republicans have supported in the past. I think his goal is to shame the Republicans into passage of the bill. The only problem is, they have no shame. They had the lowest approval rating in history during the debt ceiling crisis and still did not blink. They have made it perfectly clear that job one is to get Barack Obama out of the White House. They could care less that the President is daring them to not pass this bill. They could care less that the bill contains elements that they have supported in the past. The end (Barack Obama limited to one term) justifies the means here. The more unreasonable the Republicans are the more empowered they become as the President capitulates to their unreasonable demands.

I was all in on “Change we can believe in.” Many of us were. But change was not what we got. Instead we had a continuation of the Bush fiscal policies and a stalled recovery. We know that you can’t cut your way out of a recession. The last time it was attempted was under President Warren Harding, and it resulted in the Great Depression. This is a perilous time and sadly, we don’t have a Commander-In-Chief that has the strength to support his own promise of change. I’m not sure if the President thinks by constantly giving in to Republican demands he will appear bi-partisan and as the reasonable one, or if he truly believes he is backed into a corner and has no choice.

I’m tired of speeches from the President. I think we all are. Barack Obama campaigned on ending the Bush tax cuts and didn’t. Obama demanded that taxes on the wealthiest be a part of the manufactured debt ceiling negotiations and then folded. If he caves in again I believe it will be the end of his presidency. I’m not sure how he expects to win the 2012 election while continuing a failed economic policy.

I saw a recent poll that said 28% of Americans believe that if John McCain had been elected President that things would be the same as they are now. I would have to agree, as I would assume McCain would have continued the Republican economic program and that’s no different than we are doing now.

The Politics of HATE

2011-09-09T09:31:00.000-07:00

Let me start by saying that Barack Obama has been a major disappointment for me. I consider him to be too weak and he appears to always be giving in to Republicans’ demands. There’s being bi-partisan and there’s just plain caving, and I feel like that’s what Obama has been doing. That being said, I still prefer our President be a Democrat as opposed to a Republican.
So my blog here isn’t about support for Barack Obama’s policies and accomplishments, but about the level of respect that should be accorded to this or any other president, Republican or Democrat and the shoddy treatment this President receives.

The idea that Republican Joe Wilson would call out “You lie!” in front of a joint session of Congress and a large television audience is appalling. Never in our history has an event like that occurred. Worse, some Tea Party people hailed Wilson as a hero for being that disrespectful. Had a democratic representative yelled that out to George Bush during his State of the Union address the Democrats would demand an apology and would probably censure the offending person. But not Joe Wilson. The republicans just suggested he apologize and received a half-hearted apology at best.
Tea Party congressman Joe Walsh released a video where he repeatedly accuses the President of lying to the American people. He doesn’t sugarcoat it any way, but flat out says “President Obama, when are you going to stop lying to the American people?” He repeats his lying accusation numerous times in his video, and speaks with utter contempt for the leader of the free world. What’s funny is this tough guy proudly proclaims the President to be a liar but when this fiscal conservative is questioned by the public about a suit by his ex-wife seeking over $100,000.00 in back child support, that’s playing dirty pool. So calling the President of the United States a liar, O.K.. Calling a congressman a deadbeat dad, well that’s inappropriate.

The President presented his jobs bill at a joint session of congress on September 8th, a speech that several representatives made a public point of not attending. Deadbeat dad and Congressman Joe Walsh among them. Whether you agree with the President or not, when he convenes a joint session to speak to the representatives of the American people, you have a duty to attend. Mr. Walsh’s idea of “changing the way Washington does business” means being an immature jerk.

The level of disrespect shown to this president is legendary. Never in our countries’ great history has the Commander-In-Chief been treated so shabbily. The question is, what is at the root of this hatred? Is it simply the difference between two political belief systems that are diametrically opposed or does it go deeper than that?

Let’s look sat the birth certificate issue. At no other time in our history has a President been required to “show their papers.” Sherri Goforth, an aide to republican state senator Diane Black, was given a “strong letter of reprimand” after embarrassing the GOP by sending a mass e-mail with a racist picture attached mocking President Barack Obama. Just this past August republican senator Doug Lamborn of Colorado said “Even if some people say, ‘Well the Republicans should have done this or they should have done that,’ they will hold the president responsible. Now, I don’t even want to have to be associated with him. It’s like touching a tar baby and you get it, you’re stuck, and you’re a part of the problem now and you can’t get away,” Former Speaker of the House and 2012 Presidential candidate Newt Gingrich had this to say, "What if [Obama] is so outside our comprehension, that only if you understand Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior, can you begin to piece together" his actions? Gingrich said. "That is the most accurate, predictive model for his behavior." Besides his reference that Barack Obama is a socialist, who adopted his Father’s supposedly socialist world view Gingrich sees the need to throw in “Kenyan,” so you make the connection of Kenyan=African=Black. Obama did not grow up in Kenya. He was raised in Hawaii by his white grandparents. Yet politician after politician refers to him as having grown up in Kenya.

Glenn Beck, the former Fox News personality said this about the President of the United States, “this president has exposed himself, I think, as a guy, over and over and over again, who has a deep-seated hatred for white people, or white culture.” Now it wouldn’t make sense to suggest a white person hates white people, so what is he saying here? Clearly he sees Barack Obama as an “uppity black man.”

Tea Party members constantly cry that “we need to take this county back.” Well I would ask them exactly who are we taking it back from? The message is clear. Barack Obama is not like us. If he’s not like the predominately white Tea Party members, than who is he like?

The President's Speech

2011-09-02T09:07:00.000-07:00

If i were addressing the nation Thursday night this is what I would say:

When I took office 3 years ago we found ourselves in the midst of the greatest financial and economic crisis since the Great depression. Major financial institutions, the bedrock of the American and international economies were imploding. The housing bubble burst, sending tens of thousands of homeowners into default and foreclosure. And jobs were lost. Millions of Americans suddenly found themselves being laid off, and for the first time many of them can remember, there were no jobs available.

Leading up to this meltdown were the Bush Tax Cuts. Overnight, the wealthiest Americans found themselves paying the lowest tax rates since the Eisenhower administration. The idea being that this increased wealth would bolster the economy, create jobs and continue the path of prosperity that is the American Dream.

But instead Americans witnessed the greatest increase in wealth in modern history. Never has the chasm between the wealthy few and those further down the economic ladder been greater. The wealthiest Americans saw their wealth grow an unprecedented amount during these last ten years while the middle class saw their incomes stagnate or even go down.

The Republican Party refers to this wealthy segment of society as the “Job Creators.” We hear over and over again that any change in these folk’s taxes will cause the cessation of any new jobs by these few wealthy individuals and corporations. So when the Bush Tax Cuts came due to expire last year I relented and extended those cuts. So if the lowest tax rate in 50 years is the key to economic prosperity in this country then I ask you Mr. Boehner, where are the jobs?

When we created the stimulus package republicans demanded we make a portion of it tax cuts for wealthy corporations so they could create jobs. We relented and instead of putting those monies toward infrastructure, nearly a third of it became tax incentives for the “job creators.” Well, where are the jobs Mr. Boehner?

During the debt-ceiling crisis, when we asked for shared sacrifice but were told sharing that sacrifice would kill job creation we again relented billionaires kept their tax breaks for their private jets. The uber-rich continued to payer a lower rate than their secretaries, all in the name of job-creation. Today we got the figures in and there were zero new jobs created in the month of August. So again I ask, where are the jobs Mr. Boehner?

In an unprecedented election last year republicans, running on a platform of job creation, won enough seats to put them in the majority and they have yet to propose or pass a single jobs bill. So partisan has Washington become that Republicans are opposing some of their own bills for no other reason then I supported them. So again I ask, where are those jobs Mr. Boehner?

I think it has become very clear to Americans that these job-creators are not creating jobs. It’s my belief that if these wealthy few paid a tax rate of 1% it would still not create jobs. Jobs are created by a demand for goods or services. Why should we expect major corporations to hire more people when there is no demand for their goods? You cannot create a demand for goods or services by throwing money at it. You won’t find an economist anywhere that supports that notion. I think we have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that making the rich richer does not create jobs. This experiment started with the Bush administration and continues to this day and yet we are in the slowest moving economy since the Great Depression. So I say that it’s time to try a different approach. Investing in infrastructure, making much-needed repairs to America’s roads and bridges and physically putting people to work. People, that when gainfully employed, will spend their earnings, investing it in our economy and thereby creating a demand for goods and services, and ultimately, creating jobs. The wealthy in America are not the job creators. It’s the hard-working middle-class Americans that create the jobs. Economies are built from the ground up, not the other way around. I think the vast majority of Americans, including many of those wealthy individuals, believe we have enough evidence after ten years of tax cuts to warrant a new approach. Those 9% of Americans that have not only lost their jobs, but their livelihoods, their pride and often their homes, deserve a new approach.

Be Careful What You Wish For, You Might Just Get It.

2011-06-22T18:17:00.000-07:00

There is some unease in the country about our still-stumbling economy. Many independents say they would consider the republican candidate over Barack Obama. While you might feel Obama has not done enough to stimulate the economy there are some things you should consider before pulling that lever.
One thing to consider is that half the money in the President’s stimulus package that was supposed to help the economy by investing in infrastructure was mutated by Republicans into what else- tax cuts for the rich. The republicans refuse to budge from this belief that making the rich richer somehow improves our lives. I’m not seeing It; and after eight years of the Bush tax cuts resulted in the worst U.S. economy since the Great Depression, no one else is seeing it work either.

The Republicans gained quite a few seats and regained a majority in the House of representatoves as well as several governerships. Based on their wins they set to work in what they believed to be a mandate from the American people and immediately set out to prevent women from having abortions, took away workers’ rights and came up with a budget that would end Medicare for seniors, and reduce taxes on the welathiest Americans to the lowest levels in history. If that isn’t enough, they’re looking to cut education to the bone, do away with the Environmental Protection Agency and their master plan, to privatize Social Security so the Wall Street barons that contribute to Republican’s campaigns can make even more money.

So come November 2012, when the time comes for you to possibly send a message to Barack Obama, keep in mind that if you elect a Republican it will mean an end to women’s right to choose, the end of unions and any worker’s rights whatsoever, and an end to the middle class as the tax burden will be put on them while millionairres and billionaires will have truckloads of tax-free money to put into Swiss bank accounts. So what I’m saying is, before you vote against Obama in anger, consider what you will get if you do.

2011-05-13T11:09:00.000-07:00

What does the Taliban want us to do? The Taliban targets anyone, stress, anyone, man, woman or child, as a target in their war on America and American ideals. Their reasoning, that everyone living in or supporting the United States is as much an infidel as the President of the United States, and is as complicit as those world leaders in carrying out American policy in the Middle East.

My question to the Taliban is this: What do you want an innocent 5-year-old child to do? Or any average American for that matter? A homemaker, the local produce man with a corner store in the city, the teenager working at the local Best Buy? What would they have to do to get you to stop waging your “war” on them?

Would they need to, like you, strap on explosives and walk into the local mall one day and kill themselves and the mall’s patrons? Or do you want that 5 year-old to murder his/her infidel parents with a kitchen knife? Does that local shopkeeper need to denounce our country and move to the Middle East to live under Taliban law? I’m asking Al Qaeda’s leadership straight out- what does the average, hard-working, family-raising American have to do to appease you and remove themselves from your target list?
I mean, you consider all peoples, toddlers and babies as the enemy. I’m asking you, what does that infant, just days old, nursing at his mother’s breast have to do to remove himself from your enemy combatant’s list?
Your targeting of innocents makes no sense. You’re targeting people that have no say in the matter. You declare that people, some too young to speak and understand, are complicit in waging war on you, and they are incapable of proving otherwise.

There were thirteen children in Bin Laden’s compound, their biggest concern was probably little more than retrieving the soccer ball they accidentally kicked over the compound’s walls. By Al Qaeda standards, they should have all been executed, along with Bin Laden’s wives. I ask you Al Qaeda; would there have been any outrage on your part had those Navy seals done that? Aren’t they as much a soldier in the war as that American infant nursing at his mother’s breast?

I'm not suggesting that we should have killed all the young Bin Laden children, just that we certainly would've have been justified in doing so if we use the standard Al Qaeda has set.

Mike Renz
The Blue Donkey

The Trickle-Down Economic Fairy Tale

2011-05-02T16:45:00.000-07:00

There was an old woman that lived in a shoe.
Her Medicare was gone and she knew not what to do.
She treated her cancer with broth and no bread.
Needless to say that she was soon after dead.

Dismantling Medicare is a Republican’s wet dream. Getting rid of any and all entitlements is the Republican’s idea of a Utopian Society. Just mentioning cutting defense spending will probably get you banished from the party. And then there’s Paul Ryan’s “Plan to Prosperity” which would cut taxes for the richest Americans another 10%. They currently pay a rate of about 16%, and apparently that’s too much. It’s a plan for prosperity alright, for rich people’s prosperity. Of course, if you buy into the whole Republican belief system, when the richest people here prosper, we all prosper. I’m not at all sure how that works. I think I get the thinking behind it, but it seems flawed to me. When the rich corporations prosper they invest that money back into the economy by creating jobs. I believe the thinking goes like this:

ABC Company manufactures soap. By reducing their tax burden, there is more money available to produce more soap. For the sake of my little story here, let’s say they create a new line of “luxury soaps.” In order to manufacture this new soap additional people are hired, thereby creating jobs. Here’s the problem I see. ABC Co. manufactures this new line of luxury soaps, but who’s buying it? No one really has the disposable income right now to buy luxury soap. So the ABC company’s soap sits there on the shelf., jobs aren’t created, disposable income doesn’t rise and it all stagnates.

Here’s my scenario. Forget the rich and the corporations. Give that tax break to a middle-class family and guess what? They now have the disposable or discretionary income to spend so ABC Company can try out a new line of luxury soap. Consumers buy it, try it, they keep buying it, production increases, and ABC Co. hires additional people to meet the demand for their luxury soap. Those people, who weren’t working before, maybe getting unemployment compensation, not spending a dime more than they have too are now working, making money, buying things, maybe even ABC’s soap and reinvesting the money into the economy. What I’m describing is pretty much how the economy worked during the Clinton administrations. The previous scenario was the one tried by the Bush Administrations. The bottom line is, the trickle-down theory had eight years to prove it works. Looking at our economy today I think we can all agree, it didn’t. Ask a Republican why it didn’t trickle-down and they’ll give you a plethora of reasons, all having to do with government interference. No one as of yet has ever given me a hard example.

Let’s look at it another way. Say we a give a multi-millionaire another 10% tax reduction. How much luxury soap will he consume with his newly-available millions? Give that same additional 10% break to tens of millions of families, they would need to buy one bar of luxury soap each to create tens of millions of sales, which benefits ABC Company and it’s rich shareholders.

Now I don’t profess to have a degree in fiancé, nor a thorough understanding of global economics, but this seems pretty simple and transparent to me. Further, we tried the Republican approach of low taxes for the rich for 8-10 years now, why not try trickle-up economics for a while and see what happens? I mean, it can’t get much worse.

Your Government is for Sale

2011-03-09T19:11:00.000-08:00

Republicans have declared war on the middle class. Republicans are taking organized steps to position themselves to govern for generations. Not possible you say? Wrong. Here’s how they’re going about it:

A conservative-leaning Supreme Court just paved the way for major corporations and even other countries to give unlimited amounts of money to campaigns. Basically, an election can be purchased now. You wouldn’t expect major domestic and multi-national corporations to pay to put a Democrat in office do you? It’s Democrats and Independents that want to reign in these huge corporations.

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker and numerous other Republican governors just elected in 2010 are making an organized and concerted effort to take away the power of unions. Before you scoff and say “we don’t need unions” think about this; it’s because of union efforts decades ago that you have a 40-hour work week, get paid overtime, get paid vacations, as well as health care. Once unions established these benefits non-union employers had to adopt them so as to remain competitive. So what happens if the unions go away? You lose the only significantcontributors to Democratic candidates. In the 2010 election 7 of the top ten election contributors were right-wing organizations, including the Chamber of Commerce, Freedoms Watch, and of course, the National Rifle Association. The two biggest contributors for Democratic candidates, the Service Employees International Union and the Teachers Union, two organizations that a couple years before were top contributors, were knocked down to 6th and 7th place. If these newly seated Republican governors can crush these unions, they will have no impact at all on future elections, and the ONLY organizations generating significant, influential amounts of money will be conservative, right-wing organizations, looking to put additional Republicans in power. Those Republicans will be quick to return the favor to their contributors.

What does this mean to you? Think it makes no difference? Think they’re all the same?To a degree, yes. Once a political career became a road to wealth it corrupted the system. The founding fathers saw it more of a part-time gig. These “public servants” and I mean that in it’s most literal sense, left their businesses or practices, to meet, create, negotiate and pass legislation, and then return to work. Now it seems to be much more about power, egos, self-preservation and being a career politician. The system is far from perfect, but we must nonetheless work within the existing framework. Regardless, we must not forget the core philosophies each side represents.

Republicans claim to believe in small government, low taxes, free enterprise, and trickle down economics. They believe that in our country’s vast melting pot that everyone has an equal opportunity to secure the “American Dream.” Let’s address some of these statements. Under the Bush Administration, government grew to it’s largest size in history. Republicans granted a major tax cut to the richest Americans under Bush, the theory being, that by increasing the wealth of these rich Americans, they would reinvest the money in their business and the economy thereby making all of us flourish. Oddly enough, after eight years of making the rich richer, middle-class Americans saw their wages go down and their hours increase. After eight years of trickle-down economics, the economy collapsed. So where did all that money go? Off-shore accounts, personal investments and acquisitions of other businesses. I think all of us have yet to see how giving a CEO the funds to buy seven homes in exotic locations benefits any of us. Under the Bush administration, government regulations for Wall Street were eliminated, resulting in lawlessness on an unmatched scale, ultimately resulting in the biggest global economic meltdown in history. More infuriating was the collection of large bonuses paid to CEO’s after asking the taxpayers and consumer’s they defrauded to bail them out. As of today, no one on Wall Street has been prosecuted for bundling and selling toxic mortgages across the globe as good investments. Wall Street’s shell game resulted in economic calamity on a global scale, and it’s far from over.

In the 1950’s, under President Dwight D. Eisenhower, the tax rate on the wealthiest Americans was 90%. That’s right- 90%. Yet it was a period of some of this countries greatest economic growth. The 400 richest taxpayers now enjoy a rate of 17%, down from 23% in 2002, and 30% in 1995. These rich folks saw their incomes double, while the average middle-class taxpayer saw his income fall as healthcare costs skyrocketed. Again and again Republicans will try and convince you that make the rich richer benefits us all. Further, it would take a minimal increase in the tax rate of the richest 2% of Americans to eliminate our national deficit instead of cutting money for education, Social Security and Medicare. I have no problem letting the wealthiest in our country shoulder the burden of our taxes. It’s the price you pay to be fortunate enough to live in a country where you can earn a multi-million dollar salary. Especially if your companies success is based on the manufacture or sale of items to middle and lower class Americans. For whom that bar of soap is a greater percentage of their income than yours. I think paying the lion’s share of taxes is both reasonable and patriotic.

Two-thirds of major corporations in the U.S. pay no income tax at all. Bank of America, bailed out by taxpayers, actually received a tax return for 2010. A $1.6 billion-dollar refund. What sort of refund did you get?

Let’s face facts, Republicans are about taking care of the wealthiest people in this country, like the billionaire Koch Brothers, who in turn take care of them by using their money and influence to get those Republicans elected. Let’s look at Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker as our example. According to Wisconsin campaign finance filings, Walker's campaign received $43,000 from the Koch Industries PAC (Political Action Committee) during the 2010 election. The Koch Brother’s PAC gave $1 million to the Republican Governors Association, which in turn spent $65,000 to help elect Walker.

The “grass-roots” efforts we hear about, such as the numerous Tea Party organizations Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks, and Citizens for a Sound Economy are not “grass-roots” at all, but funded by the Koch Brothers to the tune of 12 million dollars. It is estimated that the Koch Brothers have given as much as $196 million dollars through a network of PACs and conservative organizations over the last 10 years, almost exclusively to Republican candidates.

400 Americans have greater wealth than 50% of the entire U.S. population. Let me put that another way- 400 of the wealthiest Americans have amassed more wealth than 150,000,000 Americans income combined. Michael Moore is right. This country is far from broke. It’s simply that the wealthiest Americans don’t pay an adequate tax rate. If these ultra-rich people paid a fair tax, our country and every state in it would be solvent. Paying a higher tax rate is not penalizing people who amassed their great wealth through the capitalist system we have in place. A system that they took full advantage of. A system that allowed them to prosper. Paying a higher tax rate is not penalizing these billionaires, many of who made their fortunes selling their goods or services to their fellow citizens, who after adding money to the billionaire’s pockets, also have to shoulder the heaviest tax burden. These 400 Americans, the Koch brothers included, have more money than they could possibly spend in a lifetime. In twenty lifetimes. So I say let them pay the greater share of the taxes so that others can have the same opportunity to prosper that they did.

Don’t let the Koch Brothers buy your government. They’re motivated by greed. Being the third-richest Americans isn’t enough for them. They want all your money too. And they’re more than happy to buy any politician they have to.

Note: As of the writing of this, Scott Walker and the Republicans in Wisconsin pulled an “end-around” and passed their union-busting bill using deception. This despite polls that clearly show that 65%-70% of the population (Republican voters included) wanted him to remove the union-busting part of the bill. But in the end, Scott Walker doesn’t represent them does he? He beholden to the Koch Brothers that put him there.

Sarah Palin’s Schoolyard Mentality

2011-02-21T17:43:00.003-08:00

Sarah Palin has become irrelevant. Politically, that is. My hopes that she might run for President in 2012 and thus guarantee us thinking citizens another four years of Barack Obama are gone. But her vain, self-focused response to every criticism shows us that she’s thin-skinned and lacks the real gravitas to be taken seriously. Her constant bickering with her critics and the press should be kept in the 4th grade schoolyard where it belongs. I can easily picture her screaming at her detractors that “You better take that back!”

Time magazine is the most recent target of Mrs. Palin’s ire. She claims they published a story about her that was not true; meaning Time Magazine got the story wrong. Her irritation would be justifiable if she weren’t constantly wrong about things but asks for (and gets) a pass each time. When she makes a flub, it’s an innocent mistake. When she can’t answer a question, it’s a “gotcha’ question” (what do you read?). When someone says something wrong about her, it’s criminal! Or at least “blood libel.” And need I remind anyone that Palin’s list of gaffes is incredibly long. Too long to start listing here. Further, it’s rather hypocritical to crave the media exposure yet be angry when you’re exposed.

Do you want to know why Barack Obama is presidential and Sarah Palin is not? Barack Obama doesn’t even respond to the ridiculous “Birthers” and their claims the current President somehow managed to rise to this country’s highest office while not being born here. Nor does he respond to the misguided, misinformed people that believe he is a Muslim, and nor should he. And nor does he directly respond to those that claim he hates America. The point is, he doesn’t feel the need to take part in the playground drama of “the other kids are picking on me” and have to lash out. Sadly, and perhaps even narcissistically, Palin does.

That’s why you’re not and never will be Presidential material, Mrs. Palin. We need a leader that can perform at a global level, not a schoolyard one.

The American Parrot

2011-02-12T13:33:00.000-08:00

Birdwatchers and Ornithologists alike will be delighted to hear of the discovery of a new species of bird: The American Parrot. While little is known of the species, we do know that while they come in a variety of colors, the majorities are white. They are not shy and talk often. What is truly unique about them is that despite the fact that their habitat ranges from coast to coast, they all say the same things. Here are a few examples:

“Obama is a Muslim”

“Obama hates America.”

“Obama needs to stop apologizing for America.”

Okay, so you get the joke. If we were talking about birds this would be mildly amusing, but we’re not. We’re talking about sentient human beings with large brains who excel in their careers, successfully raise families, and make common-sense decisions everyday but when it comes to politics, they go into “parrot-mode,” and it’s frightening.

Earlier this week, Frank Luntz. political consultant, pollster, and Fox News consultant put together a focus group of Iowa Republicans. When Luntz asked how many thought President Barack Obama was a Muslim, nearly half raised their hands. Further questioning of the group by Mr. Luntz revealed that Obama constantly apologizes for America, and that he hates America. These are all right-wing media talking points and myths. There is no basis in truth about any of these notions other than Rush Limbaugh or someone at Fox News said them. And yet, for many intelligent people, that’s all the proof they need.

That’s the real danger of the Fox News network. For this media giant, facts are a nuisance. Research and facts get in the way of the message. It’s innuendo that works. During Luntz’s focus-group segment, did he ask any of his respondents what proof they had that President Obama is a Muslim, despite the fact that he has said on numerous occasions, publicly, that he is a Christian? Did Luntz ask the gentleman that complained he was tired of Obama going all over the world apologizing on behalf of America to cite one time that Barack Obama apologized to another country? And finally, did Luntz ask any on his panel to back up the claim that the current President hates his own country? No.

While most of us see a group of people that are parroting the same false talking points we’ve heard, the Fox viewer watching this sees it as validation of what they’ve already been told, when in reality, those that share those opinions are getting them from the same disingenuous source. The only validation going on here is the confirmation that Fox’s tactics work. No doubt when Rupert Murdock saw this he must have leaned back in his chair and said “Mission accomplished.”

American Obesity vs. Big Corporations

2010-09-28T10:08:00.000-07:00

Because the U.S. is such an obese country, with cities like Philly and Los Angeles DOUBLE the already-high national average for obesity, the city of Los Angeles set a moratorium on how many fast food places could be in any given area. The Republicans and all the right-wing talking heads all cried that it was the government interfering in free enterprise and it was government getting too involved in our everyday lives, but in some places, like an 8-square mile area in downtown LA, there were NO places for the elderly, or someone without a car to buy fruits, vegetables, meat, fish. The only choices were fast-food and 7-11 type foods and the junk food offered at liquor stores. Now that the fast food places aren’t snatching up every property for another McDonalds, Fresh & Easy can come in, and other supermarkets, and people now have the choice to buy healthier food, and eventually the obesity rate will come down (some-not totally, I’m sure). Sometimes the government HAS to get involved.

Did you know:

Coca-Cola and Pepsi worked together to share weeks in order to dominate every supermarket's ad? It's why you never see them on sale at the same time. It was done in an effort to take over the soda isles at supermarkets and drive RC and the rest out of business, which they have pretty much succeeded. So much for choice.

Keebler and Nabisco teamed up in an organized effort to expand their supermarket shelf space and drive Sunshine out of business. Again- you won't see Nabisco and Keebler cookies on sale at the same time.

So it isn't hard for me to believe that Pepsico, the owner of Taco Bell, Pizza Hut and KFC would make a concerted effort to expand in an area with the idea of keeping businesses that offer better food choices out of an area. To Pepsico, an artery-clogged, obese customer is a good customer. Having healthful food choices is just bad for business.

BTW, as of the writing of this, Pepsico is divesting itself of these fast-food giants to become a leaner, better-money-making machine. Couldn't possibly have anything to do with the public and political sentiment toward fast food sellers changing...

The Tea Party

2010-09-19T11:43:00.000-07:00

The up and coming Tea Party is based on the platform of restoring individual freedoms the Obama administration has supposedly taken away from us. But listen closely to Christine O' Donnell friends, the most recent and popular of the right-wing conservative Tea Party candidates to win a primary. She wants to restore your freedom- and at the same time take it away.

Her views on masturbation:

O'Donnell believes that anyone who masturbates is lusting outside of marriage, a sin, according to The Bible. "Masturbation is a selfish act." She says, and anyone who masturbates is "toying with his sexuality." She concluded: "You're going to be pleasing each other. And if he already knows what pleases him, and he can please himself, then why am I in the picture?"

So you have the individual freedom to do as you please, uh....except for masturbating. That's a violation of God's law.

After a recent trip to the MIddle East:

“I’ll tell you, I just came back from the Middle East, and it was refreshing. With all that is going on, it was refreshing not to be constantly bombarded with smut all the time."

So she likes the level of censorship practiced in the Middle East. Scary stuff.

On the television show Friends:

“It makes the treadmill go faster, but it is doing a disservice to society at large. It makes casual sex look fun. It makes the consequences of casual sex look glamorous. And they’re ignoring sexually transmitted diseases. They’re ignoring the broken hearts from pregnancy”

So Ms. O'Donnell would like to change what is put on television.

God speaks to her. That's right. The Almighty himself:

“During the primary, I heard the audible voice of God. He said, ‘Credibility.’ It wasn’t a thought in my head. I thought it meant I was going to win. But after the primary, I got credibility.”

The goal of the Tea Party is to "Take America Back" (From whom?) What they really want is to take America back to the fifties, thinking that life then was like an episode of Happy Days. So here's a party that basically wants to restore freedom to all (big corporations rank high on that list) while dictating/controlling what you watch, what you can and cannot do in the privacy of your bedrooms, and anything else they decide the Bible says. Compounding the issue is that the Bible is open to interpretation- each person can take from it what they will.

So be careful what you wish for folks, you might just get it.

The Art & Fashion Scam

2010-08-16T20:17:00.000-07:00

How many of us have seen some broadcast or feature about some fashion show featuring the "preeminent" designers of the day and the press is all agog while A-List celebrities sit in the front row going ga-ga. And how many of us have seen these masters of fashion drape their models in the most bizarre outfits. I mean stuff that looks like something aliens would wear, or some sort of psychedelic puke. Meanwhile those oh-so-trendy celebrities are salivating with excitement, while fashion magazine editors drool at the sheer boldness, creativity, and genius of the designs. The clicking of camera shutters drowns out the "oohs and ahhs" of those select audience members who are fortunate enough to be in the loop.

I say it's bullshit. 100% percent bullshit. The fashion world, like that of art, has created it's own little universe, and you and I are excluded because supposedly we don't understand fashion the way these people do. The problem is, in this little world they have created, if you dare to call it as you see it- ridiculous, you're no longer welcome. So you play the game and agree with the others that what you're seeing is sheer genius, and that these designers posses some rare vision they (and we) could never hope to achieve. Celebs go to look trendy, and editors go because it's a job, and you have to fall in line and act like these designers are something special or you not only risk appearing stupid, you're out of work. And these folks love being in the art/fashion circles, it's like a drug, because those in it are considered the elite, smarter and more cultured than the 99.9999% of the population resigned to buying their clothes at Target.

Have you seen the prices on this crap!? Looking at an issue of Shape magazine recently the fashion spread featured a skinny model wearing a $750 belt, a $2,200.00 blouse, $600 boots and so on. Some of the items listed, like a Stella McCartney piece was quoted as saying "price upon request." Better, at the end of the 6-page fashion spread there's a single page that offers affordable alternatives to what was featured. Why not just do the fashion spread featuring the affordable stuff? I mean, if you really want to sell some stuff. I wonder what percentage of Shape magazine readers are buying Stella McCartney blouses? But it's all part of the game, capitulating to the fashion moguls who claim to be ahead of the curve and setting the current trends.

The same goes with art. Robert Maplethorp for instance. Some of his photographs- Opps, I'm sorry, ART, is very good. Others are awful and downright vulgar. And yet he is revered. Because we live in America, he has every right to show it (although I think there should be some sort of rating system for his shows, like R or X-rated). I mean, a close up of a man inserting their fist up someone's anus just isn't art- it's porn- and rather perverted porn at that. http://hsieh-chunte.blogspot.com/2007/02/robert-mapplethorpe_08.html (WARNING-Some people may find these photos offensive and disturbing.) He photographs in black and white (so it must be art) and puts his moniker on it and those in the art circles gush. "It's magnificent." or "brilliant" or "It's so powerful."They'll chastise you because if you don't see the artistic value of it you're clearly to stupid to understand art. Of course, if they were to say it's disgusting they would be quickly expelled from the social circles of the "art scene" thereby making them uncultured folk like the rest of us. I'll bet you I can find a nearly identical photo, but in color, on a porn site somewhere. That wouldn't be art- just a fetish for "fisting."

I'd really like to hear your opinions on this.

Mosque at World Trade Center Site?

2010-08-15T14:11:00.001-07:00

There's a huge uproar about putting a Mosque (along with other buildings) on the area where the World Trade Center stood. I don't see the problem. Isn't that what we're about? Freedom of speech, freedom to worship, etc.? Punishing innocent Muslim worshippers (many muslims died on 9/11 as well) for something that a handful of people who twist and pervert the religion did is wrong. Terrorists are not true Muslims, terrorists do not follow the Kuran. You could pervert any religion to justify terrorism. Anyone remember studying the Crusades in history? Every major religion has blood on it's hands.

Interpretation, or more importantly, misinterpretation of religious scriptures goes on all the time. How many churches hold weekly "Bible studies" where the teacher/pastor tells you how to interpret the complex language of the Bible? How many encourage you to spread the word and create more church members?

The outrage here is misplaced. To deny a Mosque to be built there goes against everything America is supposed to stand for. Seems the knee-jerk reaction of most folks is, the 9/11 terrorists were Muslims, therefore all muslims are bad, therefore ALL Muslims responsible for tragedy of 9/11, therefore Muslim people should not be entitled to a place of worship on that site.

I'm tired of the knee-jerk reactions to every bit of news in this instant-media-24-hour-news society we have.

That's my position anyway. Anyone want to chime in?

Mike