The Good: Finally Don't Ask, Don't Tell is a thing of the past! The only bad thing about this is that only eight Republican Senators voted to repeal this nonsensical, discriminatory law. The others should be ashamed of themselves. As for Senators like John Kyl (R-Ariz), who warned that the repeal of this law would cost the lives of some soldiers -- what do you even say about this? Earth to Senator Kyl! Gay people have served in the military for eons, and they're serving in the military NOW. And guess what? I have yet to hear that anyone has been killed because the guy next to them in the foxhole was gay.
The Bad: Senator John McCain (R-Ariz). What is in the water in Arizona? This man is just imploding. From what I understand, he is so angry that Obama won the election instead of him that he won't look the President in the eye when they're in the same room. He's always been known as a hothead, but since the election he appears to only be trying to obstruct everything on Obama's agenda, and viciously so, whether it makes logical sense or not. According to reports (see the article by Dana Milbank at washingtonpost.com, for an example - I tried to copy the URL but it wouldn't let me), McCain's legendary temper is constantly in evidence now. He used to be a moderate who was famous for working across the aisle, despite his volatile temper, but I now believe that his defeat in 2008 has affected him to the point where he can no longer function as a United States Senator. He needs counseling, and I'm serious as a heart attack about that. For his own good, for the good of Arizona, and for the good of the country, John McCain should resign immediately and seek a good therapist. That kind of anger and irrational resentment has no place in the Senate.
The Ugly: Ugly is the only word to describe this insanity. After 9/11 there were numerous first responders who became ill, and some who have already died, from being in contact with the nasty chemicals, dust, and other toxins at Ground Zero. There is a bill before the Senate that would provide funding for medical monitoring of these first responders, help with treatment at centers specializing in such toxins, and extend the Victims Compensation Fund until 2031. This bill would cost $6.2 billion over ten years. You would think the Republicans would be all for this, but no! Why are they passing up the opportunity to wave the flag and invoke 9/11 as they so often do? Because this bill isn't paid for? No! It is paid for -- by closing a corporate tax loophole. Ahhhh, now we get to it! Big corporations (most of whom pay no taxes... that's right, zero) might actually have one of their many tax loopholes snipped, and of course the Republicans can't have that. Never mind the fact that we have now been in two wars that were never paid for. Never mind that they just passed a tax bill that they insisted had to keep in place tax cuts for people who make more money than I'll ever see in my lifetime -- all paid for by tacking it onto the national debt. For 9/11 first responders facing disability, and even death, the Republican response is that they just don't give a damn. How do they look at themselves in the mirror in the morning, I wonder? Update: This law was passed (!) on December 22nd. Hallejuah!
The Funny: I can't resist throwing this in. Speaker of the House-to be John Boehner is handing out the committee assignments for the new Congress that will be sworn in next month. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), never known to be the sharpest knife in anybody's drawer, the same Michele Bachman who has suggested that there should be an investigation into whether Democratic Congress members are anti-American and stating that gay marriage is the biggest issue impacting the nation (more than, say, unemployment?) -- has been given a seat on the House Intelligence Committee. Insert obvious joke here. You just can't make this stuff up.
Monday, December 20, 2010
Sunday, December 12, 2010
A Potpourri of Stuff
Give it up, Dude: Alaskan candidate for U.S. Senate Joe Miller is refusing to give up his futile effort to be named the winner in November's election. Current U.S. Senator and independent candidate Lisa Murkowski lost the Republican nomination to Tea-Partier, Sarah Palin-backed Miller, so Murkowski ran as a write-in candidate. He has tried to exclude as invalid any ballot that didn't have the little circle for "write-in" properly filled in and/or any ballot that didn't spell Murkowski's name correctly. Now, I guess if your name is Joe Miller you don't worry so much about somebody misspelling your name... but here's the kicker - Murkowski won by over 10,000 votes, and even if you count the votes that could possibly be invalidated by Miller's reckoning, she still wins by over 2,000 votes! He has petitioned the courts and they have turned him down, because the man is a fruitcake. Long past time to pack it in, Joe, you're really just embarrassing yourself at this point.
A hero he ain't: Speaking of fruitcakes... how in the world could anyone consider Julian Assange of Wikileaks infamy a hero? This guy thinks that if the governments of the world were to just post all their secrets out on the Internet that it would all be hearts and flowers, we would all get along and sing kumbaya. Now, it's one thing to put out there some cables that say unflattering things about world leaders, but to put out there information that identifies sites vulnerable to terrorist attacks, or classified information about secret operations -- this is the stuff that gets people killed. As for the intelligence analyst who downloaded all this stuff and sold it to Assange, I hope he ends up sitting his butt in jail for the rest of his natural life. I'm sure that money will buy a lot of Cheese Curls in the prison commissary.
Gone too soon: R.I.P. Elizabeth Edwards.
If this ain't bigotry I don't know what is: I used to have some modicum of respect for John McCain, but now we see that he really has gone over to the dark side. What is up with this guy? He tries to block the repeal of DADT for this reason, then that... when the military studies and surveys all point to the vast majority of those serving, and the vast majority of the American public, being in favor of repeal. Then his wife makes one of those pro-repeal print ads. So what does he do? He makes her virtually change her position, evidently because it doesn't fit with his own political stance. Hey, McCain -- if you've got a problem with gays why don't you just man up and say so??? And Cindy, honey... you've got all the money in the family, and you've still got the looks to boot. You can do better than this guy!
Palin all the time: We just can't get away from this chick. She's constantly on the news, constantly on TV, constantly in the magazines... I'm with Barbara Bush, why doesn't she just go back to Alaska and stay there? I've never seen somebody who knows so little about so much go so far. It's really nuts. And it's about to get worse as the political silly season will soon start. If she runs in 2012 I sincerely hope she wins the nomination. If Obama can't beat her, then he doesn't deserve to be President! Palin recently took on a reindeer (a.k.a. caribou) on her reality show, and guess what -- the rifle with the scope won, whaddya know! Anyone who thinks hunting is a sport, who thinks killing animals is fun, is just sick. Period. I don't agree with eating meat, because I'm a pretty smart human being and I can get my protein elsewhere. Heck, broccoli has protein in it! Why should an animal have to die so I can have lunch? But I suppose those pictures of her standing in front of a guy shoving a chicken down a grinder, or clubbing a halibut, or killing a reindeer, for crying out loud, will make some pretty interesting campaign ads -- for our side!
A hero he ain't: Speaking of fruitcakes... how in the world could anyone consider Julian Assange of Wikileaks infamy a hero? This guy thinks that if the governments of the world were to just post all their secrets out on the Internet that it would all be hearts and flowers, we would all get along and sing kumbaya. Now, it's one thing to put out there some cables that say unflattering things about world leaders, but to put out there information that identifies sites vulnerable to terrorist attacks, or classified information about secret operations -- this is the stuff that gets people killed. As for the intelligence analyst who downloaded all this stuff and sold it to Assange, I hope he ends up sitting his butt in jail for the rest of his natural life. I'm sure that money will buy a lot of Cheese Curls in the prison commissary.
Gone too soon: R.I.P. Elizabeth Edwards.
If this ain't bigotry I don't know what is: I used to have some modicum of respect for John McCain, but now we see that he really has gone over to the dark side. What is up with this guy? He tries to block the repeal of DADT for this reason, then that... when the military studies and surveys all point to the vast majority of those serving, and the vast majority of the American public, being in favor of repeal. Then his wife makes one of those pro-repeal print ads. So what does he do? He makes her virtually change her position, evidently because it doesn't fit with his own political stance. Hey, McCain -- if you've got a problem with gays why don't you just man up and say so??? And Cindy, honey... you've got all the money in the family, and you've still got the looks to boot. You can do better than this guy!
Palin all the time: We just can't get away from this chick. She's constantly on the news, constantly on TV, constantly in the magazines... I'm with Barbara Bush, why doesn't she just go back to Alaska and stay there? I've never seen somebody who knows so little about so much go so far. It's really nuts. And it's about to get worse as the political silly season will soon start. If she runs in 2012 I sincerely hope she wins the nomination. If Obama can't beat her, then he doesn't deserve to be President! Palin recently took on a reindeer (a.k.a. caribou) on her reality show, and guess what -- the rifle with the scope won, whaddya know! Anyone who thinks hunting is a sport, who thinks killing animals is fun, is just sick. Period. I don't agree with eating meat, because I'm a pretty smart human being and I can get my protein elsewhere. Heck, broccoli has protein in it! Why should an animal have to die so I can have lunch? But I suppose those pictures of her standing in front of a guy shoving a chicken down a grinder, or clubbing a halibut, or killing a reindeer, for crying out loud, will make some pretty interesting campaign ads -- for our side!
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Disappointed
I was really hoping President Obama wouldn't cave in to the Republicans, yet he has. What is astonishing to me is that the Democratic Congressional leadership was apparently blindsided by the tax cut "deal." The President went before the media and laid out the plan before he even informed the leadership what the deal was! I was hoping that having Joe Biden as his VP, who had been in the Senate for so long, would help Obama avoid this kind of political error. Obama, like the Republicans, has completely misread the mid-term elections. The results had everything to do with the demographics of the people who voted, it wasn't the blank check the GOPers think it was.
Have we learned nothing from what's happening in Europe? Several countries in the European Union have come close to bankruptcy due to high debt. So what did they do? They put into place some "austerity" measures, cutting some services and raising taxes. They realized that you cannot bring less money in, keep spending more, raise the debt ceiling, and expect the budget to ever be balanced. It just simply is not going to happen. But that's exactly what we're doing.
By bluffing and blustering the Republicans got the tax cuts extended for everyone. Why? Because the wealthy are the ones who give to their reelection campaigns! This is why we need public funding for political campaigns, folks. Unless and until we have that, politicians will continue to do what's necessary to get reelected instead of what's best for the country.
Remember the last time we balanced the budget, under Clinton? The Republicans screamed and hollered, but there were 24 million jobs created during the Clinton Administration. What has happened since the so-called Bush tax cuts went into effect? Well, we know what's happened... yet they yell for more. I don't think we necessarily have to have no debt at all, but we do need to get it down to size. China is laughing all the way to the bank.
Have we learned nothing from what's happening in Europe? Several countries in the European Union have come close to bankruptcy due to high debt. So what did they do? They put into place some "austerity" measures, cutting some services and raising taxes. They realized that you cannot bring less money in, keep spending more, raise the debt ceiling, and expect the budget to ever be balanced. It just simply is not going to happen. But that's exactly what we're doing.
By bluffing and blustering the Republicans got the tax cuts extended for everyone. Why? Because the wealthy are the ones who give to their reelection campaigns! This is why we need public funding for political campaigns, folks. Unless and until we have that, politicians will continue to do what's necessary to get reelected instead of what's best for the country.
Remember the last time we balanced the budget, under Clinton? The Republicans screamed and hollered, but there were 24 million jobs created during the Clinton Administration. What has happened since the so-called Bush tax cuts went into effect? Well, we know what's happened... yet they yell for more. I don't think we necessarily have to have no debt at all, but we do need to get it down to size. China is laughing all the way to the bank.
Saturday, December 4, 2010
Bush administration officials admit tax cut sunset was a trap
See the article below. Dan Bartlett, former communications director for the Bush administration, admitted that setting the "expiration" date for the Bush-era tax cuts at 10 years was a deliberate trap for the next administration. As I suspected, this date was selected so that the next administration would find the tax cuts (which went almost entirely to the wealthy) next to impossible to remove. Bartlett is crowing about how well the trap was set. Why do people vote for Republicans again?? What sleazebags!
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-12-02/tax-cut-extension-the-gops-fiscal-time-bomb/
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-12-02/tax-cut-extension-the-gops-fiscal-time-bomb/
Friday, December 3, 2010
If you voted for a Republican for Congress, this is what you voted for
Yesterday a vote was held in the House extending the Bush-era tax cuts to everyone making under $250,00 (and, remember, giving people who make over that amount a break on their first $250,000 of income). This is what President Obama has been promising to do since he ran for President. Only three Republicans voted to extend tax cuts for the middle class. THREE. If you voted for a Republican for Congress, this is what you voted for.
After the vote Speaker of the House-elect John Boehner called the vote "chicken crap." If you voted for a Republican for Congress, this is what you voted for.
The Republicans just sent the President a letter stating that they will vote against all non-budget Democratic-sponsored legislation unless they get their tax cuts for the wealthy. If you voted fora Republican for Congress, this is what you voted for.
The Republicans are holding out for a tax cut for all income earners, including millionaires and billionaires, even though there have been many prominent wealthy people -- such as Bill Gates and Warren Buffett -- who have asked Congress to let the tax cuts for the wealthiest people expire. (Remember, these cuts were created under the Bush administration because the Clinton administration left a big budget surplus, and the idea was to return the extra money back to the people. Anybody remember that?) If you voted for a Republican for Congress, this is what you voted for.
There was much angst over the $700 billion TARP bailout, and many people gave this as the reason why they were going to vote Republican this year. However, all but $20-some billion of that has been paid back. On the other hand, if we extend the Bush-era tax cuts to people who make over $1 million a year, guess how much will have to be borrowed? $700 billion! If you voted for a Republican for Congress, this is what you voted for.
The Republicans don't want to extend unemployment benefits for people who are out of work in the toughest economy since the Great Depression. They are willing to hold those people who are unemployed hostage in order for them to get their tax cuts for millionaires and above. If you voted for a Republican for Congress, this is what you voted for.
The Republicans say they want to cut spending. There is NO meaningful way to cut spending save to cut Social Security, Medicare and defense spending. Obviously the first two benefit the lower and middle classes most. John Boehner has already said he would like to see the retirement age for Social Security moved to 70, which means that older people would work longer (or to be forced to retire with less than full benefits) so they can have their tax cuts for the wealthy. The longer older people work the harder it will be for younger people to find jobs, thereby increasing the unemployment rate. If you voted for a Republican for Congress, this is what you voted for.
The Republicans voted to get rid of earmarks. Now, there are some earmarks, such as the Bridge to Nowhere, for instance, where it would be appropriate not to spend federal taxpayer money. But doing away with all earmarks is a purely symbolic vote on the Republicans' part. In a federal budget the size of ours, earmarks are less than 1% of that budget. Not all earmarks are equal, and some public projects will now not get done (affecting, ahem, the unemployment rate, anybody?) because the Republicans have made this ridiculous vote happen. If you voted for a Republican for Congress, this is what you voted for.
Why would anybody in their right mind -- well, unless you're wealthy and looking out after your own self-interest instead of the good of the country, say -- vote for these people? Why would anyone in the middle class vote Republican, completely against their own interests? I don't get it. Can anyone give me one bill that the Republicans have brought up that takes the side of the lower and middle classes against the wealthy? Or small business vs. big corporations? Any at all? I'll wait...
The Republicans seem to think they have some kind of mandate out of this election. Yes, they won a lot of seats in the House, although they failed to win the Senate (due in no small part to Sarah Palin-endorsed wackos on the ballot), but let's get real about what happened in November. Young people and minorities just do not turn out to vote in mid-term elections. Who turns out to vote? Older white voters. And older white voters tend to vote Republican. So strap yourself in, Boehner, I think you're in for a rocky ride 'long about November of 2012!
A big shout-out to Nancy Pelosi, who has shown incredible courage in her tenure as Speaker in forcing votes like the one that happened yesterday, as well as getting health care through (although I do have my issues with what was in there due to Republican tinkering),. She has done this even though she knew there was a possibility that by doing so she would no longer be Speaker in 2011. Now President Obama needs to show the same kind of spine.
After the vote Speaker of the House-elect John Boehner called the vote "chicken crap." If you voted for a Republican for Congress, this is what you voted for.
The Republicans just sent the President a letter stating that they will vote against all non-budget Democratic-sponsored legislation unless they get their tax cuts for the wealthy. If you voted fora Republican for Congress, this is what you voted for.
The Republicans are holding out for a tax cut for all income earners, including millionaires and billionaires, even though there have been many prominent wealthy people -- such as Bill Gates and Warren Buffett -- who have asked Congress to let the tax cuts for the wealthiest people expire. (Remember, these cuts were created under the Bush administration because the Clinton administration left a big budget surplus, and the idea was to return the extra money back to the people. Anybody remember that?) If you voted for a Republican for Congress, this is what you voted for.
There was much angst over the $700 billion TARP bailout, and many people gave this as the reason why they were going to vote Republican this year. However, all but $20-some billion of that has been paid back. On the other hand, if we extend the Bush-era tax cuts to people who make over $1 million a year, guess how much will have to be borrowed? $700 billion! If you voted for a Republican for Congress, this is what you voted for.
The Republicans don't want to extend unemployment benefits for people who are out of work in the toughest economy since the Great Depression. They are willing to hold those people who are unemployed hostage in order for them to get their tax cuts for millionaires and above. If you voted for a Republican for Congress, this is what you voted for.
The Republicans say they want to cut spending. There is NO meaningful way to cut spending save to cut Social Security, Medicare and defense spending. Obviously the first two benefit the lower and middle classes most. John Boehner has already said he would like to see the retirement age for Social Security moved to 70, which means that older people would work longer (or to be forced to retire with less than full benefits) so they can have their tax cuts for the wealthy. The longer older people work the harder it will be for younger people to find jobs, thereby increasing the unemployment rate. If you voted for a Republican for Congress, this is what you voted for.
The Republicans voted to get rid of earmarks. Now, there are some earmarks, such as the Bridge to Nowhere, for instance, where it would be appropriate not to spend federal taxpayer money. But doing away with all earmarks is a purely symbolic vote on the Republicans' part. In a federal budget the size of ours, earmarks are less than 1% of that budget. Not all earmarks are equal, and some public projects will now not get done (affecting, ahem, the unemployment rate, anybody?) because the Republicans have made this ridiculous vote happen. If you voted for a Republican for Congress, this is what you voted for.
Why would anybody in their right mind -- well, unless you're wealthy and looking out after your own self-interest instead of the good of the country, say -- vote for these people? Why would anyone in the middle class vote Republican, completely against their own interests? I don't get it. Can anyone give me one bill that the Republicans have brought up that takes the side of the lower and middle classes against the wealthy? Or small business vs. big corporations? Any at all? I'll wait...
The Republicans seem to think they have some kind of mandate out of this election. Yes, they won a lot of seats in the House, although they failed to win the Senate (due in no small part to Sarah Palin-endorsed wackos on the ballot), but let's get real about what happened in November. Young people and minorities just do not turn out to vote in mid-term elections. Who turns out to vote? Older white voters. And older white voters tend to vote Republican. So strap yourself in, Boehner, I think you're in for a rocky ride 'long about November of 2012!
A big shout-out to Nancy Pelosi, who has shown incredible courage in her tenure as Speaker in forcing votes like the one that happened yesterday, as well as getting health care through (although I do have my issues with what was in there due to Republican tinkering),. She has done this even though she knew there was a possibility that by doing so she would no longer be Speaker in 2011. Now President Obama needs to show the same kind of spine.
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Earth to Republicans: We're still in charge!
Senator Mitch McConnell and would-be Speaker of the House John Boehner are under some kind of delusion. After the mid-term elections they control the House (for now), but the Democrats still control the Senate and, of course, the Presidency. You would think the Republicans, considering they control only one house of Congress, would be thinking about working with the Democrats. But no! These guys are making it clear that they are not going to work with the Democrats now any more than they did when we controlled the House and the Senate and they sat and their hands and refused to legislate.
The bluster that has come out of these blow-hards has been astounding!! I've never heard so much hot air in all my life. They're going to start investigations, they're going to make sure the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy stay in place (of course), they're going to repeal Obama's health care legislation, they're going to run the world! Every time one of these guys opens their mouths I laugh my ass off, because I know they won't be able to do squat. That is, not unless Obama caves and does the one thing he should not do - let them have their way.
The Republicans are bullies, pure and simple, and the only way to handle bullies is to ignore them, and that is precisely what Obama should do. Unfortunately I think he's more in a conciliatory mood, when what he should do is take as hard a line as they have. You can't work with Republicans, that has become crystal clear. For them it's their way or the highway. The only thing the Democratic party can do is make sure they have more seats than the Republicans in order to advance any part of their agenda.
So, Mr. President, show your cajones and tell the Republicans to screw off. If you don't you are in danger of losing liberals like me as well as moderates. Because I know I, for one, will not have a problem casting a protest vote for, say, the Green Party in 2012 if you let them have their way. Turning the government over to the Republicans is not what we voted you in for!
The bluster that has come out of these blow-hards has been astounding!! I've never heard so much hot air in all my life. They're going to start investigations, they're going to make sure the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy stay in place (of course), they're going to repeal Obama's health care legislation, they're going to run the world! Every time one of these guys opens their mouths I laugh my ass off, because I know they won't be able to do squat. That is, not unless Obama caves and does the one thing he should not do - let them have their way.
The Republicans are bullies, pure and simple, and the only way to handle bullies is to ignore them, and that is precisely what Obama should do. Unfortunately I think he's more in a conciliatory mood, when what he should do is take as hard a line as they have. You can't work with Republicans, that has become crystal clear. For them it's their way or the highway. The only thing the Democratic party can do is make sure they have more seats than the Republicans in order to advance any part of their agenda.
So, Mr. President, show your cajones and tell the Republicans to screw off. If you don't you are in danger of losing liberals like me as well as moderates. Because I know I, for one, will not have a problem casting a protest vote for, say, the Green Party in 2012 if you let them have their way. Turning the government over to the Republicans is not what we voted you in for!
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Sen. John Barrasso, Chutzpah King
I was watching Morning Joe on MSNBC this morning, and for once a Republican Senator actually made me laugh out loud. I said to myself, "self, this deserves a post on Soapy's Soapbox"! And so here it is!
Guest John Barrasso, Republican Senator from Wyoming, actually referred to sunsetting the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy as the "Obama Tax Hikes"! Ya gotta love it, just the sheer chutzpah of that! The Republicans under acting President Bush 10 years ago put into law a huge tax cut for the wealthy (and a teeny tiny one for the rest of us, just so we couldn't say we were left out). And in their genius they decide not to let these (supposedly temporary) tax cuts sunset in, say, 5 or 6 years, but to make it 10 years! Why 10 years? Because once Bush was out of office the next President, who of course had the possibility of being a Democrat, would have to decide whether or not to continue them. And if said Democratic President decided to let them sunset -- remember, as the Republicans originally wrote in the bill -- they could call them tax hikes!!
So I wonder who else is going to get the memo to refer to what they so proudly called the 'Bush tax cuts' as the 'Obama tax hikes'. Hmmmm....
Guest John Barrasso, Republican Senator from Wyoming, actually referred to sunsetting the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy as the "Obama Tax Hikes"! Ya gotta love it, just the sheer chutzpah of that! The Republicans under acting President Bush 10 years ago put into law a huge tax cut for the wealthy (and a teeny tiny one for the rest of us, just so we couldn't say we were left out). And in their genius they decide not to let these (supposedly temporary) tax cuts sunset in, say, 5 or 6 years, but to make it 10 years! Why 10 years? Because once Bush was out of office the next President, who of course had the possibility of being a Democrat, would have to decide whether or not to continue them. And if said Democratic President decided to let them sunset -- remember, as the Republicans originally wrote in the bill -- they could call them tax hikes!!
So I wonder who else is going to get the memo to refer to what they so proudly called the 'Bush tax cuts' as the 'Obama tax hikes'. Hmmmm....
Friday, October 8, 2010
My two cents about a lot of things
The 2010 campaigns have less than a month to run, and it's high time I made a few points. I'm shaking my head at people who voted for Barack Obama thinking he could fix a severely damaged economy, get everyone back to work, rewrite the Constitution so Washington works differently, and solve world peace in 18 months, and who are disappointed that he hasn't gotten all that done. Do I wish some things had been done that haven't? Hell, yes. I've said before on this blog that I'm disappointed that more hasn't done for the environment and to address climate change. But I didn't think so many people out there would be simple-minded enough to think that he owned a magic wand. Washington is all about deal-making, and unfortunately the Democrats didn't have a big enough majority to get done what they wanted to do without having to deal with the Republicans, who basically sat on the their hands and refused to legislate, something they're actually being paid to do, the last time I looked.
The answer is NOT to vote the Republicans back in, yet I know that they will make big gains in the elections. Part of that is because people on the right just tend to be angrier, and angry people vote. Well, I'm angry too, and everyone should be at the joke that is the GOP's new plan, Pledge To America. There's some vague promise in there to cut taxes (while we already have the lowest tax rates since 1960) and cut the federal budget. Anyone who knows anything about the federal budget should already know this -- there is no meaningful way to cut the federal budget without cutting Social Security and Medicare. Period. None. So what the Republicans aren't telling you is that they intend to do just that. John Boehner, the wanna-be Speaker of the House, has said so himself. He wants to raise the Social Security normal retirement age to 70. For a lot of us it's already 66 or 67, now the Republicans want to raise it higher. Do they really think people want to work to age 70? Isn't that just hurting a) the middle class, and b) the job situation, as older people who don't retire at 65 will cause a dearth or jobs for younger workers? Does John Boehner really understand anything??
I've been wondering why they don't just suggest increasing the cap at which people pay Social Security taxes. It is now $106,800, with a tax rate of 6.20%. That means if you make $106,800 or $2 million, you will pay $6,621.60 in Social Security taxes (and your employer will pay the same). So why don't the Republicans suggest that instead of raising the Social Security normal retirement age you just increase the wage cap to, say, $175,00? Or $200,000? Ohhhhh, I forgot... the Republicans wouldn't raise taxes on people who make a lot of money! Silly me!
Which is why they don't want the Bush tax cuts that went largely to the wealthy to expire, despite the fact that it would cost $700 billion over the next 10 years to keep them in place! Which, coincidentally, is the same amount of money spent on the stimulus plan that they campaign on as being such a waste of federal tax dollars. **Sigh**. Remind me -- why would anybody vote for these people again?
I'm not sure that the Obama healthcare plan was a good idea, either, not because now more people will be covered (they should be) or because the insurance companies will have to get rid of their lifetime caps (they should have anyway), but because the public option got taken out. The insurance companies now have no competition and no reason to hold rates down. So what happened? I just got informed that my employer-sponsored health care premiums will rise by more than 12%. Bastards. I knew this would happen. On top of that, some insurance companies are refusing to write plans for children only and otherwise doing despicable, sneaky, and nefarious things to make up for the government mandating that they actually have to pay out claims. This is why we needed some real competition for these companies, and watering this bill down and taking out the public option just meant that the insurance companies were going to get creative and find other ways to screw over everybody. Figures.
What about the governorship of California makes it worth $140 million? That's what Meg Whitman, former CEO of eBay has paid out of her own pocket to try to win the election there. That is just an unconscionable amount of money to spend to gain a little power. Hey, Meg -- if you've got $140 million to burn I could give you some suggestions about charities to spend it on! How about The Nature Conservancy, the NRDC, the National Wildlife Federation, The Audobon Society, the Red Cross, Habitat for Humanity? How about donating some money to animal shelters or the ASPCA? What the heck are you thinking??
For those of us who remember the scary days in 2008 when we weren't certain if the entire financial system was going to melt down, think about where your 401(k) is now in comparison to where it was then. Think about the fact that we were losing 750,000 jobs every month. Yes, there are still big problems, but we didn't get into this mess in 18 months and it will take longer than 18 months to get ourselves out. Impatience, in this case, is definitely not our friend.
The answer is NOT to vote the Republicans back in, yet I know that they will make big gains in the elections. Part of that is because people on the right just tend to be angrier, and angry people vote. Well, I'm angry too, and everyone should be at the joke that is the GOP's new plan, Pledge To America. There's some vague promise in there to cut taxes (while we already have the lowest tax rates since 1960) and cut the federal budget. Anyone who knows anything about the federal budget should already know this -- there is no meaningful way to cut the federal budget without cutting Social Security and Medicare. Period. None. So what the Republicans aren't telling you is that they intend to do just that. John Boehner, the wanna-be Speaker of the House, has said so himself. He wants to raise the Social Security normal retirement age to 70. For a lot of us it's already 66 or 67, now the Republicans want to raise it higher. Do they really think people want to work to age 70? Isn't that just hurting a) the middle class, and b) the job situation, as older people who don't retire at 65 will cause a dearth or jobs for younger workers? Does John Boehner really understand anything??
I've been wondering why they don't just suggest increasing the cap at which people pay Social Security taxes. It is now $106,800, with a tax rate of 6.20%. That means if you make $106,800 or $2 million, you will pay $6,621.60 in Social Security taxes (and your employer will pay the same). So why don't the Republicans suggest that instead of raising the Social Security normal retirement age you just increase the wage cap to, say, $175,00? Or $200,000? Ohhhhh, I forgot... the Republicans wouldn't raise taxes on people who make a lot of money! Silly me!
Which is why they don't want the Bush tax cuts that went largely to the wealthy to expire, despite the fact that it would cost $700 billion over the next 10 years to keep them in place! Which, coincidentally, is the same amount of money spent on the stimulus plan that they campaign on as being such a waste of federal tax dollars. **Sigh**. Remind me -- why would anybody vote for these people again?
I'm not sure that the Obama healthcare plan was a good idea, either, not because now more people will be covered (they should be) or because the insurance companies will have to get rid of their lifetime caps (they should have anyway), but because the public option got taken out. The insurance companies now have no competition and no reason to hold rates down. So what happened? I just got informed that my employer-sponsored health care premiums will rise by more than 12%. Bastards. I knew this would happen. On top of that, some insurance companies are refusing to write plans for children only and otherwise doing despicable, sneaky, and nefarious things to make up for the government mandating that they actually have to pay out claims. This is why we needed some real competition for these companies, and watering this bill down and taking out the public option just meant that the insurance companies were going to get creative and find other ways to screw over everybody. Figures.
What about the governorship of California makes it worth $140 million? That's what Meg Whitman, former CEO of eBay has paid out of her own pocket to try to win the election there. That is just an unconscionable amount of money to spend to gain a little power. Hey, Meg -- if you've got $140 million to burn I could give you some suggestions about charities to spend it on! How about The Nature Conservancy, the NRDC, the National Wildlife Federation, The Audobon Society, the Red Cross, Habitat for Humanity? How about donating some money to animal shelters or the ASPCA? What the heck are you thinking??
For those of us who remember the scary days in 2008 when we weren't certain if the entire financial system was going to melt down, think about where your 401(k) is now in comparison to where it was then. Think about the fact that we were losing 750,000 jobs every month. Yes, there are still big problems, but we didn't get into this mess in 18 months and it will take longer than 18 months to get ourselves out. Impatience, in this case, is definitely not our friend.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Christine O'Donnell, double coward; and DADT
I said I would call out Christine O'Donnell as a double coward if she refused to answer questions from any press outlet other than Fox News. Sure enough, she's taking Sarah Palin's advice and refusing to answer questions from mainstream media outlets, even CNN.
Christine, you are running for United States Senator. For you to refuse to answer questions about serious matters like whether or not you've been living for the last several years on campaign contributions, or whether you didn't pay your taxes, then it's obvious you just want to represent the right-wing population of Delaware -- those people who don't know what's really going on because all they listen to is Fox News and Rush Limbaugh -- and not the people of Delaware as a whole. You have no business running for this office if you are not willing to face these charges and explain them to the people you expect to represent. If these charges are unfounded, then you should have no problem answering these questions from any legitimate media outlet.
Sadly, the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell failed in the Senate on a vote of 56-43 when it was filibustered by the Republicans. It is now obvious that it's impossible to get anything passed through Congress without 60 votes. In that case I think the filibuster rule must be changed. It is unlikely, if not impossible, that any one party will have a clear 60 votes in the Senate ever again. That means that our government, as it is currently constructed, has ceased to work.
The fact that patriotic, talented Americans are precluded from serving in the military due to the circumstances of their birth is anti-Democratic, anti-American, and obviously discriminatory. This should have been overturned long ago. This is another example of legislation the Obama administration should have put forward while the Democrats had a larger majority in the Senate.
Obama should now use the option of executive order to at least end the dismissal of gay military personnel under DADT. The vast majority of the people of this country, as well as the majority of our military leaders, are in favor of overturning this discriminatory policy. It looks like he'll have to take matters into his own hands now that Congress has become so dysfunctional.
Christine, you are running for United States Senator. For you to refuse to answer questions about serious matters like whether or not you've been living for the last several years on campaign contributions, or whether you didn't pay your taxes, then it's obvious you just want to represent the right-wing population of Delaware -- those people who don't know what's really going on because all they listen to is Fox News and Rush Limbaugh -- and not the people of Delaware as a whole. You have no business running for this office if you are not willing to face these charges and explain them to the people you expect to represent. If these charges are unfounded, then you should have no problem answering these questions from any legitimate media outlet.
Sadly, the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell failed in the Senate on a vote of 56-43 when it was filibustered by the Republicans. It is now obvious that it's impossible to get anything passed through Congress without 60 votes. In that case I think the filibuster rule must be changed. It is unlikely, if not impossible, that any one party will have a clear 60 votes in the Senate ever again. That means that our government, as it is currently constructed, has ceased to work.
The fact that patriotic, talented Americans are precluded from serving in the military due to the circumstances of their birth is anti-Democratic, anti-American, and obviously discriminatory. This should have been overturned long ago. This is another example of legislation the Obama administration should have put forward while the Democrats had a larger majority in the Senate.
Obama should now use the option of executive order to at least end the dismissal of gay military personnel under DADT. The vast majority of the people of this country, as well as the majority of our military leaders, are in favor of overturning this discriminatory policy. It looks like he'll have to take matters into his own hands now that Congress has become so dysfunctional.
Monday, September 20, 2010
Kooky right-wingers and other musings
OK, I can't resist giving my two cents about Christine O'Donnell, the Tea Party/Republican candidate for Senate representing Delaware. On Bill Maher's Politically Incorrect in 1999 she said she dabbled in witchcraft, had a picnic date on an altar that still had blood on it, but that she never joined a coven (well, thank goodness for that)! In explaining this she tried to shrug it off by asserting that everyone has odd friends in their high school days.
Now, it's been a looooong time since high school, so I must search my brain cells... I remember drinking a little vodka one of the neighbor kids sneaked out of the parents' liquor cabinet. Let's see... oh yeah, there was that time I actually skipped school (on senior skip day with the boyfriend I ended up marrying a few months later, much to my regret now, but I digress). Anyway, I was grounded for an entire month and told quite firmly by my parents that I would surely be on my way to juvenile jail if I kept it up (and I was a straight A student), so no more skipping school for me! Hmmm... well, there was... no.... maybe that time... nope, definitely not very exciting... gee, you know, I can't remember ever doing anything that rivals hanging out with witches on a non-Halloween evening or having a picnic on a Satanic altar! Darn!! Well, my school must have just been oddly -- what's a good word -- boring.
Gee, what's that I hear from the right? The silence is deafening! They're all thinking, "oh crap - here we find someone who looks, dresses, walks and talks like Sarah Palin, she wins the primary and this comes out?" Can you just imagine what they would say if this was the Democratic candidate we were talking about? Holy cow, they'd be shoving each other out of the way to get to the microphones like a bunch of first graders playing musical chairs!!
Now, the masturbation thing is just darn funny, I don't care who ya are... but saying that homosexuals are mentally ill really ticks me off, Christine!
BTW, there is a world of difference between Satanism and Wicca. Wiccans don't believe Satan exists, and worship nature. OK? Everybody straight now?
Now frankly I do think this was a long time ago and it kind of amounts to making a mountain out of a molehill, seriously, but I'm still going to call coward on Christine, who cancelled her planned Sunday talk show appearances. Get yer right-wing ass up there and talk to the people, Christine, and if you follow Sarah Palin's advice and only go on right-wing nut friendly Fox News, I'll call double coward on ya!
Anyway, I must get on to Newt Gingrich, who has gone from disgusting (need I recount the story of how and when he told his first wife he wanted a divorce? slimy!!) to downright whacked. Lately he's been saying some pretty coookooo things, like saying Obama has a "Kenyan, anti-colonial" view. So 1) he's trying to reinforce this ridiculous idea that our President was not born in the U.S., and 2) he says "anti-colonial" like it's a bad thing, but as Bill Maher pointed out on Larry King Live recently, our Founding Fathers thought being anti-colonial was pretty cool. You would think that Obama had hung on his father's every word since birth, but as we know Obama Sr. saw his son for maybe 12 minutes of his life, so I'm not sure where Newt is going with this... for someone who used to have the exalted post of Speaker of the House it's truly sad to see how low he's sunk.
A new right-wing crazy enters the fray! Joe Miller, Tea Party Senate candidate from Alaska, says that unemployment benefits are unconstitutional! Whoa, there, Joey... I seem to recall that Americans pay unemployment insurance out of their paychecks so they can get those benefits if they ever need them, and besides, if they didn't get unemployment checks they would get... welfare checks! Well, that's soooo much better. What a ninny.
On the other hand, I have to give a shout-out to Colin Powell, who seems to be the only grown-up in the Republican Party these days. He reiterated that the President is a Christian and that he was born in the U.S., despite crazy attempts on the right to say otherwise, calling the ridiculous attacks on Obama "nonsense." He's the only one in that party I've heard make any sense lately!
Ummm... since when did a person become a celebrity when their only claim to fame is having an unplanned teenage pregnancy while their mom was running an unsuccessful campaign for vice president, soon to be followed by said mother quitting the governorship of the state after a year and a few months? **Sigh**.
Now, it's been a looooong time since high school, so I must search my brain cells... I remember drinking a little vodka one of the neighbor kids sneaked out of the parents' liquor cabinet. Let's see... oh yeah, there was that time I actually skipped school (on senior skip day with the boyfriend I ended up marrying a few months later, much to my regret now, but I digress). Anyway, I was grounded for an entire month and told quite firmly by my parents that I would surely be on my way to juvenile jail if I kept it up (and I was a straight A student), so no more skipping school for me! Hmmm... well, there was... no.... maybe that time... nope, definitely not very exciting... gee, you know, I can't remember ever doing anything that rivals hanging out with witches on a non-Halloween evening or having a picnic on a Satanic altar! Darn!! Well, my school must have just been oddly -- what's a good word -- boring.
Gee, what's that I hear from the right? The silence is deafening! They're all thinking, "oh crap - here we find someone who looks, dresses, walks and talks like Sarah Palin, she wins the primary and this comes out?" Can you just imagine what they would say if this was the Democratic candidate we were talking about? Holy cow, they'd be shoving each other out of the way to get to the microphones like a bunch of first graders playing musical chairs!!
Now, the masturbation thing is just darn funny, I don't care who ya are... but saying that homosexuals are mentally ill really ticks me off, Christine!
BTW, there is a world of difference between Satanism and Wicca. Wiccans don't believe Satan exists, and worship nature. OK? Everybody straight now?
Now frankly I do think this was a long time ago and it kind of amounts to making a mountain out of a molehill, seriously, but I'm still going to call coward on Christine, who cancelled her planned Sunday talk show appearances. Get yer right-wing ass up there and talk to the people, Christine, and if you follow Sarah Palin's advice and only go on right-wing nut friendly Fox News, I'll call double coward on ya!
Anyway, I must get on to Newt Gingrich, who has gone from disgusting (need I recount the story of how and when he told his first wife he wanted a divorce? slimy!!) to downright whacked. Lately he's been saying some pretty coookooo things, like saying Obama has a "Kenyan, anti-colonial" view. So 1) he's trying to reinforce this ridiculous idea that our President was not born in the U.S., and 2) he says "anti-colonial" like it's a bad thing, but as Bill Maher pointed out on Larry King Live recently, our Founding Fathers thought being anti-colonial was pretty cool. You would think that Obama had hung on his father's every word since birth, but as we know Obama Sr. saw his son for maybe 12 minutes of his life, so I'm not sure where Newt is going with this... for someone who used to have the exalted post of Speaker of the House it's truly sad to see how low he's sunk.
A new right-wing crazy enters the fray! Joe Miller, Tea Party Senate candidate from Alaska, says that unemployment benefits are unconstitutional! Whoa, there, Joey... I seem to recall that Americans pay unemployment insurance out of their paychecks so they can get those benefits if they ever need them, and besides, if they didn't get unemployment checks they would get... welfare checks! Well, that's soooo much better. What a ninny.
On the other hand, I have to give a shout-out to Colin Powell, who seems to be the only grown-up in the Republican Party these days. He reiterated that the President is a Christian and that he was born in the U.S., despite crazy attempts on the right to say otherwise, calling the ridiculous attacks on Obama "nonsense." He's the only one in that party I've heard make any sense lately!
Ummm... since when did a person become a celebrity when their only claim to fame is having an unplanned teenage pregnancy while their mom was running an unsuccessful campaign for vice president, soon to be followed by said mother quitting the governorship of the state after a year and a few months? **Sigh**.
Sunday, September 12, 2010
Reflections on 9/11
I watched a couple of specials on 9/11 yesterday. Although it's been 9 years now, I can vividly remember what it felt like that day... the disbelief, the sadness, the worry at what our future held.
On that day 2,752 people died at the World Trade Center, over 400 of whom were firefighters and police officers. 184 people were killed at the Pentagon. 44 people were killed on Flight 93. That's a total of almost 3,000 people who lost their lives that day because of radical terrorists.
But I was thinking as I was watching the television specials how many of our troops have now died in the war in Iraq now that the combat operations are over. Counts I found online vary a little bit, but here's the numbers I'm going with: 4,418 of our own forces have died, and another 318 troops from coalition forces have also died. This doesn't count the tens of thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians -- men, women and children -- who lost their lives in this war, the true count of which will never be known. It also does not count the over 30,000 wounded who have returned, many of them with bodies, minds and lives changed forever.
For what? Iraq had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks. As big a monster as Saddam Hussein was, and of all the horrific acts he has perpetrated, these attacks were not his doing. There were no weapons of mass destruction there (as the Bush administration had to know, considering officials sent there to look for them found no indication of any active WMD program). And yet Bush and Cheney sent over 4,000 of our troops to their deaths, more than the number of people who died in the attacks on 9/11. I think they did so for their own personal and political reasons. (Saddam did attempt, once upon a time, to assassinate Bush Sr., was the son seeking payback?) Bush was feeling pressure to do something to atone for the 9/11 attacks. Cheney flat made up the stories about WMD, Saddam and Osama bin Laden combining forces, secret meetings in Prague, etc. etc.... and yet they seem to have gotten off scot-free with the blame for the lives lost in an unnecessary and tragic war, the final toll of which was more than the number of people we lost on 9/11/2001.
So when you think about the 9/11 attacks and the tragedy on that day, don't forget to include the tragic loss of life in a war that should never have been. They are victims too.
On that day 2,752 people died at the World Trade Center, over 400 of whom were firefighters and police officers. 184 people were killed at the Pentagon. 44 people were killed on Flight 93. That's a total of almost 3,000 people who lost their lives that day because of radical terrorists.
But I was thinking as I was watching the television specials how many of our troops have now died in the war in Iraq now that the combat operations are over. Counts I found online vary a little bit, but here's the numbers I'm going with: 4,418 of our own forces have died, and another 318 troops from coalition forces have also died. This doesn't count the tens of thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians -- men, women and children -- who lost their lives in this war, the true count of which will never be known. It also does not count the over 30,000 wounded who have returned, many of them with bodies, minds and lives changed forever.
For what? Iraq had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks. As big a monster as Saddam Hussein was, and of all the horrific acts he has perpetrated, these attacks were not his doing. There were no weapons of mass destruction there (as the Bush administration had to know, considering officials sent there to look for them found no indication of any active WMD program). And yet Bush and Cheney sent over 4,000 of our troops to their deaths, more than the number of people who died in the attacks on 9/11. I think they did so for their own personal and political reasons. (Saddam did attempt, once upon a time, to assassinate Bush Sr., was the son seeking payback?) Bush was feeling pressure to do something to atone for the 9/11 attacks. Cheney flat made up the stories about WMD, Saddam and Osama bin Laden combining forces, secret meetings in Prague, etc. etc.... and yet they seem to have gotten off scot-free with the blame for the lives lost in an unnecessary and tragic war, the final toll of which was more than the number of people we lost on 9/11/2001.
So when you think about the 9/11 attacks and the tragedy on that day, don't forget to include the tragic loss of life in a war that should never have been. They are victims too.
Saturday, August 7, 2010
"Birthers" and other miscellaneous stuff
Lt. Col. Terrance Lakin, a decorated military flight surgeon, is undergoing a court-martial because he's a "birther," one of the folks who believes President Obama was not born in this country. He is refusing to deploy to Afghanistan because he thinks President Obama is not legitimately the President and therefore has no right to send him overseas. This is tragic -- because not only is an apparently good medical officer going to ruin his career over this nonsense, but because it proves that even someone who is an intelligent, upstanding citizen can be snowed by this right-wing crap. By the way, if he thinks the President is illegitimate, why does he stay in the military at all? Why doesn't he just refuse to get up and go to work??
Now, this same man didn't have any problem serving under "President" Bush, who really was serving illegitimately as President, for eight years! I don't think Bush won either one of his elections fair and square (I could tell you why but that would mean a really long post), but nobody on the right questioned it. And presumably this soldier wouldn't have had a problem deploying under a President McCain, who was born in Panama! I know, I know -- everyone assumes that if you're born on foreign soil but on a military base that you're a natural born citizen, but hey, it's never been tested in a court of law, has it? I heard nothing from the right asking whether or not John McCain was legitimately able to run for President. And yet here they are questioning Obama's eligibility -- would they be doing so if he were 100% white and his father was a Baptist or a Methodist? Of course not. So then this could only have something to do with his race and his father's religion. Sad.
I was thinking the other day about why the "birthers" are demanding that Obama produce the long form of his birth certificate (which the authorities in Hawaii have said numerous times exists and is kosher), and the only thing I can come up with is that they want that photo of the name Barack Obama listed with a birthplace of Kenya and the religion listed as Muslim. Of course, this refers to our President's father, but that won't stop them from cropping it out and mailing it around to all their friends as "proof" that President Obama isn't a American and isn't a Christian. Otherwise, they would just accept what the State Department does to get an American passport, the short form of the birth certificate. (Hasn't it occurred to them that you can't get the short form of a certificate if there's no long form for it to begin with? **Sigh**. I guess not.)
Anyway, it's a tragedy that this man is willing to throw away his military career for this made-up crazy bullshit. But that's what he's about to do. I hope he rethinks this.... our men and women in Afghanistan need good doctors.
I see that, unfortunately, SUVs are getting hot again. Do people never learn? Or do they just really not care?
Congratulations to Elena Kagan, who was confirmed to be the 4th woman to sit on the Supreme Court!
About the mosque that wants to open a couple of blocks from Ground Zero -- wouldn't the Christian thing to do be to let it open? Isn't Christianity supposed to be about loving one's neighbors and all that stuff? Frankly, I think they'd be nuts to open it because I can't imagine it would be very safe for them there... but let's face it, people, if all Muslims were terrorists then there would be a whole lot more attacks than there have been, common sense telling me that there are millions of Muslim faithful around the world.
What worries me about Afghanistan if we leave is the fate of the women there. Time has a disturbing cover photo this week that illustrates the tragedy better than any words I could say. An 18-year old girl had her nose and ears hacked off by her husband at the command of the Taliban. Her "crime?" Fleeing the abuse her husband and his family heaped on her. I'm glad she managed to escape and will undergo reconstructive surgery here... but how many more Afghan women are trapped in the same kind of horror?
Now, this same man didn't have any problem serving under "President" Bush, who really was serving illegitimately as President, for eight years! I don't think Bush won either one of his elections fair and square (I could tell you why but that would mean a really long post), but nobody on the right questioned it. And presumably this soldier wouldn't have had a problem deploying under a President McCain, who was born in Panama! I know, I know -- everyone assumes that if you're born on foreign soil but on a military base that you're a natural born citizen, but hey, it's never been tested in a court of law, has it? I heard nothing from the right asking whether or not John McCain was legitimately able to run for President. And yet here they are questioning Obama's eligibility -- would they be doing so if he were 100% white and his father was a Baptist or a Methodist? Of course not. So then this could only have something to do with his race and his father's religion. Sad.
I was thinking the other day about why the "birthers" are demanding that Obama produce the long form of his birth certificate (which the authorities in Hawaii have said numerous times exists and is kosher), and the only thing I can come up with is that they want that photo of the name Barack Obama listed with a birthplace of Kenya and the religion listed as Muslim. Of course, this refers to our President's father, but that won't stop them from cropping it out and mailing it around to all their friends as "proof" that President Obama isn't a American and isn't a Christian. Otherwise, they would just accept what the State Department does to get an American passport, the short form of the birth certificate. (Hasn't it occurred to them that you can't get the short form of a certificate if there's no long form for it to begin with? **Sigh**. I guess not.)
Anyway, it's a tragedy that this man is willing to throw away his military career for this made-up crazy bullshit. But that's what he's about to do. I hope he rethinks this.... our men and women in Afghanistan need good doctors.
I see that, unfortunately, SUVs are getting hot again. Do people never learn? Or do they just really not care?
Congratulations to Elena Kagan, who was confirmed to be the 4th woman to sit on the Supreme Court!
About the mosque that wants to open a couple of blocks from Ground Zero -- wouldn't the Christian thing to do be to let it open? Isn't Christianity supposed to be about loving one's neighbors and all that stuff? Frankly, I think they'd be nuts to open it because I can't imagine it would be very safe for them there... but let's face it, people, if all Muslims were terrorists then there would be a whole lot more attacks than there have been, common sense telling me that there are millions of Muslim faithful around the world.
What worries me about Afghanistan if we leave is the fate of the women there. Time has a disturbing cover photo this week that illustrates the tragedy better than any words I could say. An 18-year old girl had her nose and ears hacked off by her husband at the command of the Taliban. Her "crime?" Fleeing the abuse her husband and his family heaped on her. I'm glad she managed to escape and will undergo reconstructive surgery here... but how many more Afghan women are trapped in the same kind of horror?
Saturday, July 24, 2010
How conservatives and the right-wing media are literally destroying the planet
I'm really going to let fly on this one, so if you have sensitive "ears" you might want to skip this post. I didn't name this the Soapbox for nothing!
One of the things I was hoping would happen when Obama was elected was that we would finally get some serious environmental legislation. The folks in Congress should have had this written and ready to go when he hit office. People were actually starting to show some concern about environmental issues, especially after the success of Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth, about climate change and the state of the environment. Finally it was on people's radar screens! Not so now. Recently, in a poll of what the most important national issues were, the environment came in dead last.
We are now over a year and a half into this presidency and we have lost the advantage we had in the Senate to get things passed, now having to rely on a Republican or two to get anything done. The right-wing media played up what is now known as "Climategate," the controversy that started in November of 2009 when some e-mails from climate scientists at the University of East Anglia were hacked into and released on the Internet, with certain passages picked out and twisted to make it appear as though these scientists were deliberately manipulating their data. These e-mails were used by the right wing to convince people that climate change was a hoax and that the science to support human activity-caused global warming was not there.
We heard a lot about this when it happened. However, on July 7th of this year, after three separate and independent reviews into the situation, the University and its scientists were completely absolved of any manipulation of the data. The scientific concensus that global warming, a.k.a. climate change, was real and that it was caused in large part by human activity was upheld by the reviews. If you hadn't heard anything about this, it wouldn't surprise me, because the media barely mentioned it. I'm sure this had no airplay whatsoever on Fox News or at any Rupert Murdoch-owned media outlet.
The right-wing media outlets are masters at twisting the facts, and out-and-out lying. I've actually had people I work with, people who are otherwise intelligent folks, parrot back to me bullshit they heard on Fox News, Rush Limbaugh or some other right-wing outlet. Because this is all they listen to, they know nothing about environmental issues. Case in point: I work with a guy who is pretty good with computers, who is a fanatic about eating healthy -- he won't even drink Coke -- but when I tried to talk to him about organic cotton he had absolutely no idea what I was talking about. When I told him non-organic cotton has toxins like formaldehyde (yeah, the stuff they pickle you in to preserve the body after you die), he shrugged and said he would just wash the clothes first before he wore them. OMG - has anyone ever heard of permanent press? Does this wash out, or hello, isn't it called permanent?
Senator Kerry has written a climate change bill that includes caps on greenhouse gas emissions. However, this week Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said the bill was not passable due to lack of Republican support, and instead has introduced a much smaller bill that does not include any caps for greenhouse gases. The odds of even this bill passing, in my opinion, are slim and none. The only Republican who looked like a possible vote for a climate change bill, Lindsey Graham, is now saying that the science has changed, and that the warnings about it were "oversold." Whaaaat???? Did he miss the memo about the scientists at UEA being absolved of manipulating data while he was busy watching Fox News???
Let's face it -- the right wing doesn't give one cold, dead rat's ass about the environment. They are now and always have been on the side of big oil and big coal, and damn the environmental consequences. They're claiming that they don't want the bill because it "isn't paid for." That's bullshit, pure and simple. When they had the majority they didn't care that Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy weren't paid for. They didn't care that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (the war in Iraq, in particular, being a made-up and unnecessary one), weren't paid for. In fact, these two wars, which will cost us in the trillions of dollars, was kept out of the Republican Congress' budget completely! So don't give me this crap that saving the environment isn't paid for. The simple truth is that conservatives don't care. As I said in a previous post, the gasoline tax is long overdue for a raise. We could pay for this bill by doing just that, but as I also said in that post, Congress will never do it because it might mean they wouldn't get reelected. And what a tragedy that would be.
I would like to have clean air to breathe, clean water to drink, and I would like to have my food grown on land that is not full of chemicals, thank you. I would like to be able to look at the city skyline and not see brown. I would like for the glaciers to stop melting at alarming rates. I would like for future generations to be able to actually eat healthy fish out of the oceans. I would like for the polar bears and the caribou to be left the hell alone to live out their lives as nature intended them to. And I would like to not ever see high ozone level warnings on the local weather report. Call me crazy.
But will I ever be able to see those things? No. Not because it's not logical, not because it should be common sense, but because the Drill, Baby, Drill conservatives and the right wing care more about big oil and big coal making more and more money than they do about the health of our environment for ourselves and for future generations.
Which is not only unbelievably sad, but downright immoral. That's right, I consider anyone who cares more about making money than they care about the health of themselves, their children, wildlife and the environment in general to be as immoral as they come. That should be a logical conclusion for anyone, but greed is a powerful thing, and right now it's controlling all our lives in ways we will come to regret later -- when it's too late.
One of the things I was hoping would happen when Obama was elected was that we would finally get some serious environmental legislation. The folks in Congress should have had this written and ready to go when he hit office. People were actually starting to show some concern about environmental issues, especially after the success of Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth, about climate change and the state of the environment. Finally it was on people's radar screens! Not so now. Recently, in a poll of what the most important national issues were, the environment came in dead last.
We are now over a year and a half into this presidency and we have lost the advantage we had in the Senate to get things passed, now having to rely on a Republican or two to get anything done. The right-wing media played up what is now known as "Climategate," the controversy that started in November of 2009 when some e-mails from climate scientists at the University of East Anglia were hacked into and released on the Internet, with certain passages picked out and twisted to make it appear as though these scientists were deliberately manipulating their data. These e-mails were used by the right wing to convince people that climate change was a hoax and that the science to support human activity-caused global warming was not there.
We heard a lot about this when it happened. However, on July 7th of this year, after three separate and independent reviews into the situation, the University and its scientists were completely absolved of any manipulation of the data. The scientific concensus that global warming, a.k.a. climate change, was real and that it was caused in large part by human activity was upheld by the reviews. If you hadn't heard anything about this, it wouldn't surprise me, because the media barely mentioned it. I'm sure this had no airplay whatsoever on Fox News or at any Rupert Murdoch-owned media outlet.
The right-wing media outlets are masters at twisting the facts, and out-and-out lying. I've actually had people I work with, people who are otherwise intelligent folks, parrot back to me bullshit they heard on Fox News, Rush Limbaugh or some other right-wing outlet. Because this is all they listen to, they know nothing about environmental issues. Case in point: I work with a guy who is pretty good with computers, who is a fanatic about eating healthy -- he won't even drink Coke -- but when I tried to talk to him about organic cotton he had absolutely no idea what I was talking about. When I told him non-organic cotton has toxins like formaldehyde (yeah, the stuff they pickle you in to preserve the body after you die), he shrugged and said he would just wash the clothes first before he wore them. OMG - has anyone ever heard of permanent press? Does this wash out, or hello, isn't it called permanent?
Senator Kerry has written a climate change bill that includes caps on greenhouse gas emissions. However, this week Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said the bill was not passable due to lack of Republican support, and instead has introduced a much smaller bill that does not include any caps for greenhouse gases. The odds of even this bill passing, in my opinion, are slim and none. The only Republican who looked like a possible vote for a climate change bill, Lindsey Graham, is now saying that the science has changed, and that the warnings about it were "oversold." Whaaaat???? Did he miss the memo about the scientists at UEA being absolved of manipulating data while he was busy watching Fox News???
Let's face it -- the right wing doesn't give one cold, dead rat's ass about the environment. They are now and always have been on the side of big oil and big coal, and damn the environmental consequences. They're claiming that they don't want the bill because it "isn't paid for." That's bullshit, pure and simple. When they had the majority they didn't care that Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy weren't paid for. They didn't care that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (the war in Iraq, in particular, being a made-up and unnecessary one), weren't paid for. In fact, these two wars, which will cost us in the trillions of dollars, was kept out of the Republican Congress' budget completely! So don't give me this crap that saving the environment isn't paid for. The simple truth is that conservatives don't care. As I said in a previous post, the gasoline tax is long overdue for a raise. We could pay for this bill by doing just that, but as I also said in that post, Congress will never do it because it might mean they wouldn't get reelected. And what a tragedy that would be.
I would like to have clean air to breathe, clean water to drink, and I would like to have my food grown on land that is not full of chemicals, thank you. I would like to be able to look at the city skyline and not see brown. I would like for the glaciers to stop melting at alarming rates. I would like for future generations to be able to actually eat healthy fish out of the oceans. I would like for the polar bears and the caribou to be left the hell alone to live out their lives as nature intended them to. And I would like to not ever see high ozone level warnings on the local weather report. Call me crazy.
But will I ever be able to see those things? No. Not because it's not logical, not because it should be common sense, but because the Drill, Baby, Drill conservatives and the right wing care more about big oil and big coal making more and more money than they do about the health of our environment for ourselves and for future generations.
Which is not only unbelievably sad, but downright immoral. That's right, I consider anyone who cares more about making money than they care about the health of themselves, their children, wildlife and the environment in general to be as immoral as they come. That should be a logical conclusion for anyone, but greed is a powerful thing, and right now it's controlling all our lives in ways we will come to regret later -- when it's too late.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
President Obama - please raise my taxes
I didn't mistype the heading. I really do think that we need to raise taxes on people who can afford it, particularly those very well-to-do people who got the lion's share of the tax cuts under the Bush administration. That isn't me, by the way! But I do make enough money that I can afford a small tax increase, and if we want to cut the deficit and still have Social Security available in the future -- and we had better have it available, considering employers are ditching their retirement plans faster than I can down a bag of M&M's -- then we need to raise taxes.
But politicians only talk about cutting taxes, not raising them. Why? Because cutting taxes gets them reelected. This isn't about what's best for the country in the long-term, this is about their jobs, which frankly is all they seem to care about. Look at the European countries who are doing the tough thing to balance their budgets, meaning cutting services and raising taxes. It is impossible to balance this budget, with the deficit we face due to so many years of Republican rule where the wealthy and large corporations made out like bandits, without raising taxes.
Yes, there are a lot of people out of work. But they won't be hit by tax increases. There are people who are struggling, but tax increases can be structured so they won't get hit, either. Think about these recent headlines: 1.7 million iPhone 4's were sold in three days. 1 million iPads were sold in 28 days. You can't tell me there aren't people out there with disposable income who could stand a little tax increase. By the way, the Bureau of Economic Analysis recently reported that we now have the lowest tax rate since 1950. The lowest tax rate in 60 years!!
First, you let the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy expire. Then you look at increasing the gasoline tax, big time. The gasoline tax has been 17 cents a gallon since a gallon of gas was $1, which means it was 17%. Now that gas is $2.58 a gallon, what is the gas tax? 17 cents. That's 6.6%. We need to increase this by at least 25 cents a gallon. 17% would be 43 cents a gallon, so say we raise it 26 cents over the current 17 to make it 43 cents. That would make a gallon of gas $2.84, and that's still quite a lot below its high of well over $4.
Not only would raising the gas tax increase revenues, but it might finally push more people to get into fuel-efficient cars, particularly hybrids, thereby helping to forestall climate change. (By the way, if you could find a non-hybrid regular car that got 45+ mpg -- currently there is no such animal -- you would still be putting out more pollution than a hybrid car that gets the same gas mileage. That's why I think the government should do all it can to push for hybrids, plug-in hybrids, electric cars, and clean energy sources to power them.)
Make no mistake about it, Europe, China and Japan are going full-speed ahead with clean energy and more fuel efficient cars. China is investing 10 times the amount of money we are on clean energy research. We can either get with the program, or we can be left behind. Again.
So, Mr. President, reverse course and raise my taxes. But only after the Bush tax cuts, which never should have been passed in the first place, are allowed to expire.
But politicians only talk about cutting taxes, not raising them. Why? Because cutting taxes gets them reelected. This isn't about what's best for the country in the long-term, this is about their jobs, which frankly is all they seem to care about. Look at the European countries who are doing the tough thing to balance their budgets, meaning cutting services and raising taxes. It is impossible to balance this budget, with the deficit we face due to so many years of Republican rule where the wealthy and large corporations made out like bandits, without raising taxes.
Yes, there are a lot of people out of work. But they won't be hit by tax increases. There are people who are struggling, but tax increases can be structured so they won't get hit, either. Think about these recent headlines: 1.7 million iPhone 4's were sold in three days. 1 million iPads were sold in 28 days. You can't tell me there aren't people out there with disposable income who could stand a little tax increase. By the way, the Bureau of Economic Analysis recently reported that we now have the lowest tax rate since 1950. The lowest tax rate in 60 years!!
First, you let the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy expire. Then you look at increasing the gasoline tax, big time. The gasoline tax has been 17 cents a gallon since a gallon of gas was $1, which means it was 17%. Now that gas is $2.58 a gallon, what is the gas tax? 17 cents. That's 6.6%. We need to increase this by at least 25 cents a gallon. 17% would be 43 cents a gallon, so say we raise it 26 cents over the current 17 to make it 43 cents. That would make a gallon of gas $2.84, and that's still quite a lot below its high of well over $4.
Not only would raising the gas tax increase revenues, but it might finally push more people to get into fuel-efficient cars, particularly hybrids, thereby helping to forestall climate change. (By the way, if you could find a non-hybrid regular car that got 45+ mpg -- currently there is no such animal -- you would still be putting out more pollution than a hybrid car that gets the same gas mileage. That's why I think the government should do all it can to push for hybrids, plug-in hybrids, electric cars, and clean energy sources to power them.)
Make no mistake about it, Europe, China and Japan are going full-speed ahead with clean energy and more fuel efficient cars. China is investing 10 times the amount of money we are on clean energy research. We can either get with the program, or we can be left behind. Again.
So, Mr. President, reverse course and raise my taxes. But only after the Bush tax cuts, which never should have been passed in the first place, are allowed to expire.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Why the deep water drilling moratium should NOT be lifted
Today a federal judge (who owns stock in eight oil companies or oil-related companies, including Transocean) overturned the President's 6-month moratorium on deepwater oil drilling.
This moratorium affected only 33 wells. There are over 3,600 wells in the Gulf right now. All except for those 33 are still drilling, still producing oil. Yet those who are against the President's moratorium want everyone to believe that drilling has come to a standstill in the Gulf.
Let's get one thing straight -- oil spills happen all the time, you just don't hear about them unless they're catastrophic. We still don't understand all the reasons why the BP rig blew up, and I believe there were multiple reasons. We know what happened when it did, though. BP was completely unprepared to cap the leak or to clean up the spill. Due to the massive size of this spill we are using all the available resources we have to try to get it under control. If there was to be another large spill, there would be no resources available to fight it.
If an airplane were to crash because of a fatal flaw in the wiring, would the FAA not ground all the planes of that type until they were fixed? Absolutely. We have no idea right now, today, whether or not another one of those deepwater oil rigs could blow, but we know that it would be fatal if one did. As horrible as the environmental devastation happening in the Gulf right now is, let's not forget that 11 men died in the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon rig.
It is unconscionable that this judge did not recuse himself from this case in light of his investments in the oil industry. He made a partisan, self-interested, and incorrect ruling today that I hope gets overturned on appeal.
This moratorium affected only 33 wells. There are over 3,600 wells in the Gulf right now. All except for those 33 are still drilling, still producing oil. Yet those who are against the President's moratorium want everyone to believe that drilling has come to a standstill in the Gulf.
Let's get one thing straight -- oil spills happen all the time, you just don't hear about them unless they're catastrophic. We still don't understand all the reasons why the BP rig blew up, and I believe there were multiple reasons. We know what happened when it did, though. BP was completely unprepared to cap the leak or to clean up the spill. Due to the massive size of this spill we are using all the available resources we have to try to get it under control. If there was to be another large spill, there would be no resources available to fight it.
If an airplane were to crash because of a fatal flaw in the wiring, would the FAA not ground all the planes of that type until they were fixed? Absolutely. We have no idea right now, today, whether or not another one of those deepwater oil rigs could blow, but we know that it would be fatal if one did. As horrible as the environmental devastation happening in the Gulf right now is, let's not forget that 11 men died in the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon rig.
It is unconscionable that this judge did not recuse himself from this case in light of his investments in the oil industry. He made a partisan, self-interested, and incorrect ruling today that I hope gets overturned on appeal.
Saturday, June 5, 2010
Help the wildlife harmed by the oil spill!
As the Gulf oil spill gets worse and worse, so do the conditions for the wildlife who are caught up in the mess. If you would like to help but can't physically be there, consider giving a donation to a wildlife organization or some other environmental charity. I have been a member of the National Wildlife Federation for many years, but I donated some extra money in order to help them defray the expenses they are incurring by having to have people down there in the Gulf - especially knowing they will have to be there for many more months!
The National Wildlife Federation is at nwf.org. You could also consider donations to the National Resource Defense Council (NRDC) or the Audobon Society.
The National Wildlife Federation is at nwf.org. You could also consider donations to the National Resource Defense Council (NRDC) or the Audobon Society.
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Spill, baby, spill
Yeah, how's that "drill, baby, drill" thing working out for ya now? About as well as coal mining? When are we going to learn our lesson about these dangerous, dirty fossil fuels and just get the hell off of them already?? How many miners are going to be killed (29 a few weeks ago, 2 this week), as well as additional 11 oil rig workers... I don't think anyone has ever been killed due to solar or wind power.
Well, they'll pay up now. Lawyers get ready, there will be plenty of work for you for the forseeable future. Unfortunately money won't bring back the delicate ecosystems this spill will ruin, it won't save the wildlife who will die from it, it won't bring back the fishing trade, the tourists or the local economy.
Now is the time to make the pledge to get off fossil fuels once and for all. There shouldn't even be a question about this now.
Hardly reported in this country, Australia is suffering a similar, devastating oil spill that threatens the already fragile Great Barrier Reef. This is a tragedy for this area, which was already facing horrific loss of coral and other environmental devastation. The Great Barrier Reef is one of the main tourist attractions in Australia.
We should have gotten off fossil fuels 50 years ago. Coal mine operators have been allowed to run amuck, blowing the tops off of mountains and wreaking environmental catastrophe. Oil spills have ruined coastlines, fishing, wildlife, and the economies of the affected areas. BP asserted to our government that a spill like this was highly unlikely -- so they lied. They lied to Congress and they lied to the President, who should never have decided that expanding offshore oil drilling was a good idea. BP knew they didn't have safeguard equipment on that rig. They also knew that putting it on there would be half a million dollars, and they didn't want to spend the money.Well, they'll pay up now. Lawyers get ready, there will be plenty of work for you for the forseeable future. Unfortunately money won't bring back the delicate ecosystems this spill will ruin, it won't save the wildlife who will die from it, it won't bring back the fishing trade, the tourists or the local economy.
Now is the time to make the pledge to get off fossil fuels once and for all. There shouldn't even be a question about this now.
The tragic animal abuse behind the Kentucky Derby
This weekend there will be a lot of glitz and glamour at the Kentucky Derby. Outrageous hats, expensive outfits, colorful jockey silks, mint juleps.... it all looks pretty fun. But the outer glamour of horse racing hides some horrific animal abuse.
Many people remember the lengths that Barbaro's owners went to to try to save him after a fall at the Preakness after he had won the Kentucky Derby. But for most race horses, a broken leg means being put down quickly, usually right on the track.
Most people think race horses who can no longer run live out idyllic lives on picturesque farms. It's just not true. This is a business. If a horse is no longer making money for an owner, if there are no stud fees coming in, it is very likely the horse will be sold. And it's quite likely the buyer will be sending the horse, stuffed along with many others, to the slaughterhouse. It's no longer legal in this country to slaughter horses for food; this means they get trucked many miles out of the country to be slaughtered, their meat sold overseas. If you think this can't happen even to prestigious race winners, you're wrong. It can, and it does.
Then there's the hidden horror of the nurse mare foal. These are foals deliberately taken from their mothers as soon as they're born, and allowed to starve to death, or sold for meat. Why does this happen? Because the mother is instead given to a foal thought to be a good racing prospect as a wet nurse. The unfortunate foal of the mother is just considered disposable goods.
We must stop watching horse racing, stop betting on it, stop supporting it. This is the dirtiest and cruelest of "sports," all dolled up in a facade of glitz.
Many people remember the lengths that Barbaro's owners went to to try to save him after a fall at the Preakness after he had won the Kentucky Derby. But for most race horses, a broken leg means being put down quickly, usually right on the track.
Most people think race horses who can no longer run live out idyllic lives on picturesque farms. It's just not true. This is a business. If a horse is no longer making money for an owner, if there are no stud fees coming in, it is very likely the horse will be sold. And it's quite likely the buyer will be sending the horse, stuffed along with many others, to the slaughterhouse. It's no longer legal in this country to slaughter horses for food; this means they get trucked many miles out of the country to be slaughtered, their meat sold overseas. If you think this can't happen even to prestigious race winners, you're wrong. It can, and it does.
Then there's the hidden horror of the nurse mare foal. These are foals deliberately taken from their mothers as soon as they're born, and allowed to starve to death, or sold for meat. Why does this happen? Because the mother is instead given to a foal thought to be a good racing prospect as a wet nurse. The unfortunate foal of the mother is just considered disposable goods.
We must stop watching horse racing, stop betting on it, stop supporting it. This is the dirtiest and cruelest of "sports," all dolled up in a facade of glitz.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Why full employment will be a tough nut to crack
Full employment -- which is considered to be about 4-5% as there is always the chronically unemployed and people recently unemployed looking for work -- will be a tough thing to accomplish. You have to look not only at what happened in the last few years to create this economic mess, but you have to go farther back. Very far.
What happened during World War II? Males (mostly) went off to war and the women went to the factories to build planes and tanks. And what happened after the war was over? Women went back into the kitchen and men went back to the factories. In my father's day it was unusual for a woman to work outside the home. I think on our block there was only one working mom, and she was a nurse.
Then in the last three decades of the century women started entering the work force in droves. They started putting off marriage until after they had begun careers. If you were to look at a street in an average subdivision these days what would you see? (Besides much larger houses than my father ever dreamed of having!) You would see just the opposite of what I did when I was growing up. It would be the odd house where the wife didn't have a job outside the home.
But what happened at the same time all this was going on? The computer revolution. I'm old enough to have learned to type on a manual typewriter. I can remember my boss telling me he couldn't foresee a time when everyone would have a computer on their desks. And what did computers do? They upped productivity. By many multiples. At the same time, our manufacturing base went to other countries. Everything from programmers to lawyers are being outsourced overseas. In addition, people are living longer and in some cases wanting (or needing) to work longer as well.
All of this was masked by the fact that we Americans just kept buying stuff.
In short, it's a perfect storm that doesn't bode well for the employment picture.
I will suggest something that may or may not fly with a lot of people, but here goes: if you are lucky enough to be in a position where you don't have to work, try volunteering instead. I personally know several people who don't work for the money, but just for the companionship of being around people and to have something to do. If you are one of those people, there are so many organizations who need volunteers that you are sure to find one that interests you and that needs your time and talents. You could help walk dogs or clean litter boxes at a local animal shelter; read books to kids at hospitals; rock babies in the preemie unit; help build a home for someone who needs one, or shelve books at the local library. You would get the satisfaction of having something to do with your time, of helping others, and you would leave open a job for someone else who really needs one.
Just an idea.
What happened during World War II? Males (mostly) went off to war and the women went to the factories to build planes and tanks. And what happened after the war was over? Women went back into the kitchen and men went back to the factories. In my father's day it was unusual for a woman to work outside the home. I think on our block there was only one working mom, and she was a nurse.
Then in the last three decades of the century women started entering the work force in droves. They started putting off marriage until after they had begun careers. If you were to look at a street in an average subdivision these days what would you see? (Besides much larger houses than my father ever dreamed of having!) You would see just the opposite of what I did when I was growing up. It would be the odd house where the wife didn't have a job outside the home.
But what happened at the same time all this was going on? The computer revolution. I'm old enough to have learned to type on a manual typewriter. I can remember my boss telling me he couldn't foresee a time when everyone would have a computer on their desks. And what did computers do? They upped productivity. By many multiples. At the same time, our manufacturing base went to other countries. Everything from programmers to lawyers are being outsourced overseas. In addition, people are living longer and in some cases wanting (or needing) to work longer as well.
All of this was masked by the fact that we Americans just kept buying stuff.
In short, it's a perfect storm that doesn't bode well for the employment picture.
I will suggest something that may or may not fly with a lot of people, but here goes: if you are lucky enough to be in a position where you don't have to work, try volunteering instead. I personally know several people who don't work for the money, but just for the companionship of being around people and to have something to do. If you are one of those people, there are so many organizations who need volunteers that you are sure to find one that interests you and that needs your time and talents. You could help walk dogs or clean litter boxes at a local animal shelter; read books to kids at hospitals; rock babies in the preemie unit; help build a home for someone who needs one, or shelve books at the local library. You would get the satisfaction of having something to do with your time, of helping others, and you would leave open a job for someone else who really needs one.
Just an idea.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Health care reform may come down to Mass. Senate race
Today is the special election to fill the Senate seat vacated with the death of Sen. Ted Kennedy. Martha Coakley, the Democrat, is facing Scott Brown, the Republican, in an election that all the pollsters are saying will flip the seat to the GOP side.
How ironic it is that the future of the health care reform bill may be in the hands of Massachusetts voters. See, Massachusetts has universal, state-sponsored health care, which was instituted by a Republican governor, Mitt Romney. And just how did Romney manage to make this happen with nary a whimper from any tea bagger, right-wing talk show host or Faux News story? He did it with George W. Bush's help -- and with help from the rest of the taxpayers of America.
Yes, that's right, folks! You and I, those of us who do not reside in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, are helping pay for their universal health care through our federal tax dollars! Notice the silence coming from the right? Oh, that was a Republican governor. Well, I guess it's not socialism when a Republican does it.
her case of "I'm doing fine, I don't care about the rest of you people!"? Let's hope not!
How ironic it is that the future of the health care reform bill may be in the hands of Massachusetts voters. See, Massachusetts has universal, state-sponsored health care, which was instituted by a Republican governor, Mitt Romney. And just how did Romney manage to make this happen with nary a whimper from any tea bagger, right-wing talk show host or Faux News story? He did it with George W. Bush's help -- and with help from the rest of the taxpayers of America.
Yes, that's right, folks! You and I, those of us who do not reside in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, are helping pay for their universal health care through our federal tax dollars! Notice the silence coming from the right? Oh, that was a Republican governor. Well, I guess it's not socialism when a Republican does it.
her case of "I'm doing fine, I don't care about the rest of you people!"? Let's hope not!
Saturday, January 9, 2010
The jobs report is meaningless...
... and the media doesn't know how to report it, either.
So according to the December jobs report, the economy lost another 85,000 jobs last month. In addition, the jobs report for November was revised from a loss of 11,000 jobs to a gain of 4,000 (this revision to positive growth territory, by the way, went almost totally unreported).
Let me tell you why neither one of these jobs reports matters. What happened in November and December? What happens every November and December? Go ahead, think about it, I'll wait.... hmmm hmmm hmmm.... dee dee dee.... OK, remember something called the holiday season? Anybody?? Well, apparently the media forgets about it.
This is why the jobs report is worthless. In November stores hire temporary help for the holiday season. At the end of December they let them go. Giving you one total jobs number for any given month is misleading at best. What I want to know is -- how many full-time, permanent jobs were created? Put the temporary seasonal jobs in another category. Put the construction jobs in another category. Don't muck up the jobs report number with jobs that are seasonal or only last for a few weeks. I guarantee you that around March there will be a lot of construction jobs starting back up, which should goose the numbers. And I guarantee you also that the media will once again only report the total.
Why can't the media give us some useful information instead of trying to panic everyone and claiming the sky is falling? Is the job market bad? Yes, we know that... maybe they think bad news sells better than accurate news? Who knows? Someday I think I'll write a post about how bad the state of journalism is these days!
So according to the December jobs report, the economy lost another 85,000 jobs last month. In addition, the jobs report for November was revised from a loss of 11,000 jobs to a gain of 4,000 (this revision to positive growth territory, by the way, went almost totally unreported).
Let me tell you why neither one of these jobs reports matters. What happened in November and December? What happens every November and December? Go ahead, think about it, I'll wait.... hmmm hmmm hmmm.... dee dee dee.... OK, remember something called the holiday season? Anybody?? Well, apparently the media forgets about it.
This is why the jobs report is worthless. In November stores hire temporary help for the holiday season. At the end of December they let them go. Giving you one total jobs number for any given month is misleading at best. What I want to know is -- how many full-time, permanent jobs were created? Put the temporary seasonal jobs in another category. Put the construction jobs in another category. Don't muck up the jobs report number with jobs that are seasonal or only last for a few weeks. I guarantee you that around March there will be a lot of construction jobs starting back up, which should goose the numbers. And I guarantee you also that the media will once again only report the total.
Why can't the media give us some useful information instead of trying to panic everyone and claiming the sky is falling? Is the job market bad? Yes, we know that... maybe they think bad news sells better than accurate news? Who knows? Someday I think I'll write a post about how bad the state of journalism is these days!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)