9/12 Teabaggers: Hypocrisy In Action

So, the Million Moron March went off without a hitch?

Oh joy.

You’ll have to pardon my lack of enthusiasm because, well, it’s really hard to see past all the hypocrisy and discern what, exactly, these people are protesting. I just have to ask, if they’re so hell-bent on “defending” principles of American Democracy, where were they for the past eight years?

Let’s start at the beginning, shall we? The Teabaggers get their name from the idea that they’re “Taxed Enough Already.” Ok, fine, I’ll grant them the fact that even though they want a strong military, they don’t want to pay for it, but are they protesting the tax cut they’re getting under Obama’s plan? Or are they protesting the 4% tax increase that their CEO might get?

Do you really want to go there, lady??

Yea, well I don't want Bush's either. How 'bout you take it, m'kay?

Then there’s the deficit issue (DEFECITS R EIVL!!! OMGLOLWTF!!?!??!1111). They burden future generations with debt that can never be repaid. Uh, yup. This is what “libruls” were saying about the years of deficit spending to fund the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Where were the teabaggers then? The national debt more than doubled under W and they were cheering his war efforts on (but, it’s not like the troops saw the benefits).

At least, that's what Glenn Beck tells me...

While we’re here, let’s talk about Iraq for a second. If the teabaggers wanted an opportunity to demand Presidential truth-telling, the lead-up to the war in Iraq was a prime opportunity. Bush and Co told almost 1000 documented lies about starting a war with Iraq. And, where were the teabaggers? Unfortunately, they’re in the group that still believes Saddam had something to do with 9/11 (which is absurd considering even Cheney admitted it’s not true).

You lost one election. Get a fucking grip...

This person should definitely be in therapy (covered by private insurance, of course)

Speaking of Cheney, let’s talk about freedoms. Apparently, Obama is going to take the teabaggers’ freedom (which one(s), they don’t say), but Cheney (along with Bush) succeeded in actually demolishing the Constitution (you know, that piece of paper). Freedoms like the right to be free from unlawful search and seizure, the right to be free from unlawful punishment and the right to know why you’re being detained. The PATRIOT Act and the Military Commissions Act were two of the greatest affronts to American freedoms and the teabaggers wholeheartedly supported their enactment (Remember "if you're not a terrorist, you don't have to worry?") . And, teabaggers today continue to work against the freedoms of individual choice that truly define America.

So, they don’t really understand taxes, don’t truly care about deficits, aren’t actually concerned with the truth, definitely not interested in freedom. Oh, yea, this was supposed to be about health care ("supposed to" being the key phrase). There was surprisingly little mention of health care. It was mostly an after thought:

I wonder what poignant thought could possibly be on the front of this sign.

They’re concerned that somehow the government is going to take over health care by proposing a competitive alternative to private insurance, and simultaneously be so ineffective as to cause long waits and poor care, yet also be so effective as to cause private insurance to go out of business? Is something like that even possible? But, I guess it makes sense to people who believe Obama can be both a socialist and fascist at the same time...

Call this kid's World History/Civics teacher. Retroactive FAIL.

Yea, I'm trying to add that all up and it comes out to, um...you're a dumbass

Maybe they’re concerned about the cost. But, were they concerned about the cost of Medicare Part D, which will probably be more expensive as comprehensive health insurance reform (ten year cost estimated at $1.2 trillion), yet all taxpayer dollars go directly to PhARMA? No, no they weren’t.

Ah, nothing like people on Medicare protesting government health care:

I understand that people may be wary of so much government action, but eight years of improper, unjustifiable and sometimes illegal action cheered on by these teabaggers have brought America to the breaking point. The fact is, all these people are complicit in the real destruction that has been wrought.

So, here is my message to all the sometimes-patriots out there: You lost an election because of the failure of your leaders. You are intellectually and politically bankrupt, and generally have no legs to stand on in this debate. You didn’t show up when it mattered most, instead choosing to cheer on heinous and extreme behavior. Everyone noticed and said “No More.” If you want to have a legitimate, policy-based debate, we’re here to listen. But know this: your demagoguery of villainous characters is actually what is tearing at the fabric of our democracy. Your hateful ways will be your undoing.

But, let's be honest, hate is the real reason you came to Washington.

And they say it's not about race...

Just because?

I'm sure whoever made this sign is absolutely gorgeous

But, really, it's not about race

Bush Enron-ed America

There's really no other way to put it. And it's essentially that simple.

Bush as been committing accounting fraud since we went to war with Afghanistan. It only got worse with Iraq. How much have these wars cost? Well, we have estimates of what Congress has authorized, but that's not where the accounting fraud has come in. The fact is that most of the money for Iraq was not included in the formal budget proposals from Bush. Sure, he requested some money. But then he requested more. And more. And eventually, most of the war funding requests came outside of the formal budget process. So, Bush dug us into debt with his budgets, and further with his wars. His accounting of our country's expenses was not honest, and it undermined our economic system. Like Enron, America appeared more solvent than it really was. See the similarity between Enron stock and the Dow recently?

Ok, I'll give you the fact that Bush didn't set up offshore accounts that moved money in generally illegal and improper ways (I think). But, his system of budgeting was a smoke and mirrors act. And the mirrors have come crashing down. Obama's commtiment to honest budgeting may not be pretty. But at least it's real. We can rebuild on real. We can cut back once we know what's actually being spent (and where it goes).

But, here's the real lesson from Enron: The Republican financial gambit makes it impossible to run an honest business in the long run. It was never about establishing long-term security and stability. It was about propping up the house of cards long enough to get yours and get out. So, no, Republicans we don't want your opinion on Obama's budget. You don't know WTF you're talking about, you're not fiscally conservative. You're liars and thieves and you haven't learned your lesson from Enron.

Bush, Cheney, DeLay: here's your next job option.

Enough! This Election Is NOT About Obama

Is America regressing? Seriously. What is going on with this election?

In our personal lives we change jobs, dump boyfriends and return products when they don’t live up to our expectations. Why don’t we do the same when it comes to our politics?

This election is not about Barack Obama. It is about whether or not we as Americans want to turn our backs on the failures of the past eight years and make positive progress towards a better future. It’s about reining in the corporate interests that have poisoned our economy and restoring trust in America both at home and abroad.

The past eight years have been fraught with lies, destruction, and greed. Like a cheating spouse that begs for forgiveness yet again, John McCain pleads with the American people that he is the agent of change. McCain holds Sarah Palin aloft as evidence that he is different now, different than “those” Republicans. He swears it won’t happen again because he’s learned his lesson. No matter that, since his crushing defeat at the hands of Karl Rove in 2000, his voting record shows that he votes with Bush Administration more than a majority of the time (when he manages to show up). And make no mistake, Sarah Palin isn’t a pitbull in lipstick, she’s Dick Cheney in drag…and probably a better shot.

John McCain may not think you’re stupid (that’s the purview of Karl Rove and Steve Schmidt), but he thinks you’re forgiving. He thinks that if he pleads long enough and hard enough, you’ll forgive his transgressions and give him and his friends (because, let’s be honest, John McCain is bought and paid for) just four more years. Of course, John McCain’s friends also think that your suffering is part of a mental recession and that because Americans can go to an emergency room, there's no such thing as an uninsured American.

Reality provides a different look at the situation for Americans. McCain knows this so he wants to shift the debate (and thanks to our spineless media, he’s been able to). He doesn’t want this election to be about the issues or the problems that Americans are facing. He doesn’t want to talk about the economy or the war in Iraq (the Surge is ok though); he doesn’t want to talk about renewable energy or the soaring deficit. Because he knows he will lose if Americans demand an explanation for the last eight years. He knows he will lose when people ask him “How will you help us?” and he has no answer. No, John McCain wants to make this election about Barack Obama. Just look at his ads. Doesn't look like the "respectful campaign" he promised, does it? A majority of McCain’s ads focus on Obama because McCain is attempting to force the debate away from the real issues of this election. The fact that these ads are largely based on falsehoods is lost on most Americans (thanks again, “journalists”).

Now, conservatives will point to the fact that Democrats have been in control of Congress since January 2007 and, by that simple fact, it means that they are somehow responsible for our current situation. But, until one of those yammering heads can point to what legislation, exactly, the Democrats have passed that would have caused this, their argument is moot. Unfortunately, the Dems in Congress have capitulated on every issue. They haven’t forced an end to the war in Iraq, they haven’t repealed the Bush tax cuts or ended oil subsidies, they caved on FISA. And they took impeachment off the table, right up front.

Now, in the rare instance where Congress manages to pass meaningful legislation that would actually help Americans, such as Children’s Health Insurance or enforcing the Eighth Amendment by banning torture or improving the Medicare system, Bush goes and vetoes it. So, next time your child has to go without medical care or you hear of Americans being tortured as retaliation for the torture at Guantanamo, don’t look at this Congress. Cast your disapproving eye to the Republicans who refuse to actually help Americans.

So, in the words of Barack Obama: Enough!

Enough with this fake-outrage BS. Enough with the circus and non-issues. I don’t care who is wearing lipstick or which side can feign outrage faster. This has crossed the line from tedious to ridiculous. This election is not about Barack Obama. It’s about the crises that have been created in the last eight years and what we are going to do to reverse the damage. If you think the Constitution can stand one more pass through the shredder, then go ahead and vote for the old guy who keeps changing his positions and his fundamentalist sidekick. I, personally, like the First Amendment and want to keep it around. After these last eight years, I’m going with the Constitutional Law professor and the Senator with the history of real progress.


(This pretty much sums it up)

Dave Chappelle Was Right...

I’m having a hard time with this presidential campaign. Not that it’s unexpected, but this is such an outrageously lopsided debate that it makes me want to tear my hair out. Luckily, I’ve been busy with one of the local campaigns, but I’ve decided to come back and address some things.

I’ve heard many times that Barack Obama doesn’t “deserve” to be president. Honestly, no one deserves to be president; people have to earn it. Hillary Clinton thought she deserved to be the Democratic nominee and look what happened to her. Just because you’ve been around for a while doesn’t mean you’re entitled to anything. All achievement must be constantly earned. But, I interpret this comment against Obama two ways.

One, Barack Obama is too young to be president, like there’s some sort of line that every person is in based on age (so, I guess McCain (JSM3) would be at the head of the line). But, like the policy of promotions based on time instead of skill, you won’t end up with the most qualified candidate, just the oldest one. McCain’s been in DC for 26 years and has contributed more to the problems than the solutions, especially in recent years. JSM3 is so entrenched in DC that he’s blinded by reality. Perhaps he should just retire? But this “too young” argument really loses legs considering that Obama can join the AARP in three years. Let’s not act like he’s a child. He’s actually in the prime of his life, with the energy and enthusiasm necessary for the hardest job on earth.

Two, Obama is black. Yea, I’ll say it. Rush Limbaugh was thisclose to dropping the N-word on Obama yesterday (“little black man-child” is pretty damn close). And, every time the Republicans say they don’t want to make this about race, they bring up race and make it about race. So, somehow a Harvard-educated man who is actually of mixed-race cannot be president? Welcome to the 21st century Republicans. I know you’ve spent the past 60 years oppressing minorities, but some manage to slip through and succeed. Weird.

Of course, Dave Chappelle had it right. In my favorite political skit of all time, Chappelle imagines what would have happened if Bush was Black (ok, not just black, but the worst of all African-American stereotypes). It’s hilarious. But, sadly, it’s true. Obama is getting grilled, while McCain gets a free pass (I know I’ve mentioned this media study, but it’s quite shocking). So, race is an issue, and it’s clouding the real issues in this election.

But, on the flip side of the idea that Obama doesn’t deserve the presidency is the idea that somehow John McCain does. So, I thought it would be prudent to look at what JSM3 has done with the other entitlements in his life.

1) John McCain goes to the Naval Academy. Thanks to his father and grandfather, both admirals (or, as the Navy calls them DADmirals), John Sidney the Third was able to circumvent the application process (which is currently in the top 1% of selectivity). So, of course, with an opportunity like that, there’s nothing left to do but squander it. Which McCain did with flying colors. As we all know by now, JSM3 had to call on his father numerous times just to keep him at the Academy. And, we’re all familiar with the number 894 (as in, McCain’s rank out of 899 graduates). Super.

2) John McCain becomes a pilot. Being a pilot is cool. Most people will admit that. However, at the Naval Academy, it’s also well known that in order to become a pilot, one has to work hard an prove that they have respect for the Navy’s time and money. Well, almost everybody. Even though he graduated at the bottom of his class, McCain managed to be selected as a Naval Aviator (I imagine it had something to do with his DADmiral). And again, it was a squandered opportunity. McCain wasn’t just a poor pilot. He sucked. In his time, he crashed five airplanes. I graduated with a kid who was in flight school and came up short on the runway. Guess what? He’s not in flight school any more. He didn’t crash the plane, but he made a serious mistake. So serious that the Navy determined he was no longer eligible to be a pilot. This leads me to the belief that not only did JSM3 believe he was entitled to a prestigious aviation billet, but that nothing should keep him from continuing, even after repeated fuck ups.

3) John McCain cheats on his first wife. Apparently, in McCain’s world, he’s also entitled to a beautiful, wealthy wife. Good thing he married a model. Too bad she was in a devastating car accident. Even though she stayed with him and kept the vigil for him while he was a POW, that apparently doesn’t count. None of that “for better or worse” crap for JSM3. He just wanted better. So, he went out and got himself better. Thirty-four days after officially divorcing his first wife, JSM3 picked up the newer, faster model. I’m not going to judge the age difference, but I am going to judge the 34 days courtship. You know that saying, “once a cheater, always a cheater?” Is that the judgment we need (new slogan: JSM3=Me first)?

4) John McCain goes to the Senate. Ha, ok well, he was elected. Going to work is another question entirely. And, I know I’ve talked about his horrific attendance record before, but it’s very troubling to me. Why would someone who so blatantly shirked his responsibilities be deserving of the Presidency?

I’m really just disgusted with the way this campaign is being handled, though it’s really no different than any other. Unfortunately, we can’t just throw in the towel. We have to redouble our efforts to expose the truth about JSM3: he’s a temperamental hot-head who believes that he’s entitled to anything he wants. He may deride Obama’s ambition, but what of his own? Whatever JSM3 wants, someone in his family has given him. Where has his work been? What has he earned?

So, I’ll leave you with this quote (though from a non-traditional source): According to one classmate, "being on liberty with John McCain was like being in a train wreck." It is unclear what being with McCain during his presidency would be like for the nation. Unfortunately, America has no direct experience from which to draw with a president who was a temperamental son of a distinguished military man and who in college was a temperamental fuck-up who liked to party. What could possibly be so dangerous about that?

Hm, I wonder??

John McCain Needs Equal Media Coverage? Sounds Good To Me...

That John McCain is the worst candidate in this election is an axiom. There’s no way else to say it. Everything is says and does is confusing, wrong or false (or some combination of the three). And, yet, he keeps hanging on. Why? Well, as we’ve been made painfully aware, the media is essentially keeping him in this race by preventing any substantive discussion.

Don’t believe me? Well, let’s look at Exhibit A: The study released by the Center for Media and Public Affairs at George Mason University. This study shows that in the first six weeks of the general election, the “liberal media” was actually harder on Obama. Yea, you read that right. So all you “liberal media” conspiracy theorists can just throw that crap out the window. In the evening news broadcasts, a mere 28% of stories about Obama were positive and the whopping 72% remaining were negative. As for McCain, he faired much better, with an essentially equal 43% positive and 57% negative showing. So, any claim that the media is simply presenting stories, and not specific viewpoints, is not true.

And, for Exhibit B, we’ll look at the fact that in a recent interview, CBS covered for McCain when he made a glaring mistake, especially considering that “the surge” is his area of expertise, so to speak. Instead of airing the mistake and letting the people discuss this fact, CBS edited in an answer to a previous question, an answer where McCain impugns Obama’s motives with more lies.

But, John McCain still whines that the media is unfair to him. He’s not satisfied with significantly more positive coverage, he wants equal time, too. Well, John, in case no one has mentioned this to you, you actually have to do something newsworthy to make the news. So, while you’re opponent is meeting with cheering crowds of hundreds of thousands around the world (at your urging, none the less), you’re knocking over applesauce and checking your notes for a price of milk in Pennsylvania. And then you're complaining about unfair coverage. C’mon John, you’re supposed to be the candidate of “experience” and “wisdom,” yet you’re stomping and pouting like a child. Is this how you’re going to handle the presidency?

And then you go and run “the ad.” You know what ad I’m talking about, the ad that completely goes against the “clean campaign” you promised to run. And, shit, John, you didn’t even have a 527 do it. You approved these falsehoods all on your own. Wow! It’s the one that only aired on national TV like four times, but has been on loop on all the news networks today. But, were the talking heads debunking the falsehood-laced ad? Not a chance. MSNBC made a feeble attempt during the day, but it wasn’t until Countdown that the whole truth came out. Shall we speak those truths? Yeah, I think so.

1) First, and most importantly, Obama never planned to make the Landstuhl trip a media fanfare. It was simply going to be a trip to visit the soldiers, just as similar trips in Afghanistan and Iraq were. However, the Pentagon labeled Obama’s trip a campaign event and did not allow advisors. Or specifically, one advisor: retired Air Force Major General Gration. But please, feel free to look further into who the Pentagon official responsible for the trip blunder is. It’s hilarious…you’ll never see it coming!
2) The full Senate Foreign Relations Committee has held three hearings on Afghanistan, and Obama did attend one of those. Let’s also bear in mind that he’s a member, not a chair (and, please, McCainiacs, bring up your candidate’s attendance record. We’ll compare).
3) And, let’s clarify what kind of years we’re talking about. Decades? No. Try two and a half years. And, thanks to the wonders of modern technology, like email and “the google,” we can all know what’s going on there every single day.

And, then of course, there are the lies that McCain tells about himself…in the same ad! McCain claims he's always supported the troops, but his actual voting record shows something different:
1) In mid-2007, McCain had only shown up for four of the previous 14 votes on Iraq.
2) In 2008, that number is zero. In fact, McCain hasn’t cast a vote in the Senate since April 8th. Not for FISA, not for Medicare, and not even for the GI Bill (which he and Bush opposed).
3) April 2003, McCain tabled a motion to provide over $1 billion in National Guard and Reserve equipment (brings a new meaning to BYO).
4) October 2003, McCain tabled a motion to provide an additional $233 million for safety equipment.
5) March 2004, McCain voted. He voted against closing tax loopholes that would have provided an additional $1.8 billion in veterans’ care.
6) March 2004, McCain voted against closing corporate tax loopholes that would have provided and additional $1.5 billion for veterans’ care.
7) April 2006, McCain voted against an extra $430 million for veteran outpatient care.

Sensing a pattern here? Ok, well I’ll continue then.

8) May 2006, McCain voted against $20 million for veteran health care facilities.
9) March 2007, McCain did not show up to vote on a bill to redeploy troops from Iraq in 2008.
10) September 2007, McCain voted against an amendment for minimum rest time between deployments.

And that was pretty much the last time McCain showed up to vote on anything (scroll down for a post that discusses his attendance record in depth). Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America gave McCain a D on his voting record. Obama received an B+. Disabled American Veterans gave McCain a 20% rating on his voting record, while Obama received an 80% rating. There's a difference in being a veteran and actually supporting veterans.

So, John McCain wants more equal media coverage, and I think he deserves it. Let’s write to all the media outlets and demand that they cover McCain the same way they cover Obama. Let’s see the pundits hack apart McCain’s gaffes hour after endless hour. Let’s see them call for him to do something, and then when he does it, let’s see them call him presumptuous. Let’s see him handle the pressure of true political discourse. Actually, it’s hard enough watching him now, I don’t know if I could really stomach any more. But, I suppose I can, and gladly will, in the name of democracy.

Objection! Leading the Voter: How the GOP Stifles American Political Debate

I know I’ve said it before, but I just can’t resist it: These people are scared S**tless. What people, you might ask? Well, the GOP, of course. And why are they scared? Because they lose on every issue that is important to Americans today.

It’s unfortunate that the GOP is so scared of true debate. Why must they always ignore the facts, spin the truth, and point fingers at their opponents? It’s tiring, and more importantly, it’s hurting America. The GOP’s smoke and mirrors act is hindering effective debate on important issues and keeps America from making true progress for all.

Maybe you were lucky enough to see the RNC 2008 Critical Issues Survey. If not, it’s definitely worth a peek. And, it shows exactly who has critical “issues” in this campaign (hint: the makes of this ridiculous poll). How ridiculous? Well, let’s preview some of these “fair and balanced” questions:

Shall we start with the economy?

1. Do you think Congress should respond to the economic slowdown with a plan of tax cuts to stimulate the economy?

Hahaha, yeah. OK. Since they sunk a robust and growing economy, I’m sure they’d do wonders for a recession.

2. Do you believe our economy will grow if we cut taxes and put more money in the hands of hardworking Americans who pay taxes?

Honestly, where to start with this one? Regardless of what one believes, supply-side economics don’t work.

4. Which of the following factors do you feel is most adversely affecting the economy in your area?
Burdensome Taxes
Severe Government Regulations
Unstable Real Estate Market
Growth of Government Spending
Threat of Terrorism
Unpredictable Fluctuating Fuel Prices
Other

Oh geez! Terrorism? Yes, I’m afraid of being the victim of a suicide bomber at the market. Oh wait. I’m in America, not Iraq or Afghanistan. Gotta get that fear mongering in…

10. Should “pork-barrel” spending be completely eliminated?

Like the word “lobbyist,” “pork-barrel” and “ear marks” are getting a bad rap. And from the Republicans of all people. The most irresponsible party lampooning their own failures. Ugh. Let’s talk about the reality of ear-marked money and the abuses that the Republicans have committed.

Enough with that, let’s move to something cooler: (dun dun dun) National Security!

2. Should America surrender in Iraq regardless of the consequences in the Middle East?

Surrender? Who’s surrendering? Republicans are war-mongering, plain and simple. Nothing like stifling the debate over each candidate’s plan (well, Obama’s at least. McCain doesn’t have a coherent idea of what to do in Iraq…or Afghanistan).

3. Do you agree with Democrats who believe national defense spending should be slashed in order to fund domestic programs?

What Dems are doing this? As far as I can tell, they give Bush everything he wants on Defense spending…including no oversight. C’mon people, actions speak louder than words. Let’s talk about what people are actually doing.

5. Do you believe we should set a public date for withdrawing from Iraq even if it undermines our troops in the field?

“Even if it undermines our troops in the field?” Well, when you put it like that, I guess not. But, considering that Bush has done more to undermine our troops and our efforts, AND the Iraqis have asked for a withdrawl timeline, I would say, yes, I support the timeline.

These are some bad fucking questions. It makes me sad looking at them because it’s like watching a democracy die. But, we still have two more sections to conquer.

Now, on to Other Issues.

1. Should we appoint judges who will interpret the law instead of liberal activists who will make new laws from the bench?

“Liberal activists,” like who? You and me? We are talking about judges, right? Ok, just wanted to clear that up. Now, the SCOTUS isn’t my area of expertise, but I can see very clearly that the GOP only has intentions of politicizing the bench and not actually appointing people who are independent thinkers. Way to obfuscate the question, GOP! Gold star!!

2. Is it critical for the U.S. to develop alternative sources of energy and find new supplies of oil in order to slow inflation and keep fuel affordable?

Huh? How many questions are you trying to ask here? And, even if I say yes, it doesn’t mean I’ll agree with your plans. I think most people would say yes, but there’s nothing in here about “how.”

3. Do you think we should work to give parents with children trapped in failing schools more choices to help their children have a better future?

Trapped? Really?! No way of escaping? Wow, that does sound pretty serious. Well, I guess I agree, but one question, why not work to improve these schools? I think the last thing the GOP came up with was NCLB, so I’m going to say that their education “solutions” are nothing of the sort.

6. Do you think that forcing every American into a socialized national health care system is the best way to deal with uninsured patients?

Wow, this is a pretty serious statement. Too bad that’s not what Obama is talking about. Of course, reality doesn’t matter to the GOP. But, I wonder how the uninsured would feel about this. My guess? They’d love to have some guaranteed insurance. Just a guess, though.

And now the final section (and the one question that reveals their fear): Campaign Strategy.

3. Are you concerned about the vast sums of campaign funds being stockpiled by the Democrats and their liberal allies?

Haha, yup. The GOP doesn’t know what to do now that they’re losing the money race. They all hate their candidate, so even his best month pales in comparison to the Democrats. And they are crapping their pants. McCain even has to compete in his home state. They are on the defensive and they know they’re going to face huge losses.


So, of course, why not stifle the debate and twist the facts? Honestly, I’m surprised there were no race questions in this poll. But, there are many more gems available, if you can stomach it.

Elite? You Bet! And I Don't Care

I’ve been sitting on this idea for a little while. I just really didn’t know where to start, but “luckily” the neo-cons came to the “rescue.” I was thinking about elitism and how to handle it, when Karl Rove pathetically attempted to paint Obama as an arrogant elitist (“You know, he’s that guy at the country club…” No Karl, we don’t know people at the country club, you do.). Ha! Karl Rove, the mind behind the permanent campaign and the worst presidency in history. Maybe Karl should remember the old saying, “when you point a finger at somebody, three more point back to you.” In his attempt to brand someone as elitist, Rove demonstrated just how arrogant and elite the right wing has become. But, when you get right down to it, the people running for president are elite. What we’re really talking about these days is what kind of elite we want in power.

I’m not sure where this anti-elitist idea came from. Why do people want the “leader of the free world” to be just like the guy down the street? People understand that some people are not athletic, not everyone can sing or dance or draw. We happily chalk these up to “natural ability.” Why would politics be any different? I know, I know, politics is about the people, about ideas, and everyone can have those. Well, I’m going to lay out the truth: a lot of people are stupid. A lot of people (obviously) don’t understand the complexities of government, and even the smart ones get it wrong. It takes a special person, with a certain mix of smarts and savvy to be successful in America’s political jungle.

Here’s another secret that the GOP doesn’t want you to know: the men that founded America were highly educated, wealthy and intelligent. They weren’t the butcher, the baker and the candlestick maker. They were lawyers, judges, scientists, physicians, plantation owners and financial giants. Many were known beyond their communities, a rare feat in that time. They were elite. Or, to put it another way, do you really think that the average person could write and lead the greatest experiment in individual freedom and self-determination in history? I thought not. I certainly don’t want Larry the Cable Guy writing (or rewriting) the Constitution.

And yet, this election year, the charges of elitism are already flying. Multi-millionaires each claiming that the other is “out of touch” with the cares of the average Americans. It’s ludicrous! But, more importantly, it’s a superficial waste of time. The question shouldn’t be who is more elite, but instead, who will work for the elite and who will work for the average citizen. And, with W as our guide, it’s quite obvious that Republican policies are geared towards the wealthy. Well, “geared towards” may not be strong enough. “Specifically written for and solely benefiting the wealthy” is a better way to describe these failed policies.

I guess the question you should be asking is: What kind of elitist do you want? Do you want someone who was born into privilege, handed the best off all worlds and then married into millions? Someone who feeds of the wealth of his wife’s father? Someone who acts for the rich because they made him who he is now? Or, do you want someone who came from humble beginnings, worked his way to success, and is the epitome of the American dream? Someone continues to work for the people and continues to protect the American dream? Being elite and caring about the average American are not mutually exclusive. Let’s ensure we elect a president who believes in the dream because he is living the dream.

The Republican Pro-Family Myth

As we get into the meat of this election cycle, we will once again be subjected to the biggest Republican lie. No, not that they are the leaders in efficient, balanced government (the past seven years have pointedly contradicted that lie). And no, not the one about how they support the troops (unless you count multiple deployments, inadequate training and equipment and selling out to private contractors as support). No, this year we will once again suffer through this nauseating sound bite: The Republicans are the party of family values. Ha! Personal conduct of Republicans aside, at least for now, the fact remains that the Republican platform is decidedly anti-family.

Let’s look at this from the beginning. The Republicans have the gall to use the phrase “pro-life,” thus framing the debate in their favor. But, the issue isn’t the act of abortion because that will happen regardless of legality. The issue is choice, which is why the flip side is “pro-choice.” For a party that claims the federal government is too involved in our personal lives, this argument is non-sequitur (also, for a party that supports the death penalty to be somehow labeled as “pro-life” is a ridiculous, hypocritical joke).

There is no legal reason to ban abortion. Until we can agree on the definition of life and science (which Republicans hate) can determine when life begins, abortion is not murder. If your religion discourages abortion, fine. Don’t do it. However, that is not reason enough to prevent others from making that choice. Republicans will try to paint Democrats as giddy about abortion and excited at the prospect, but in reality, Democrats are simply trying to protect the right of Americans to choose what is best for their lives. After all, most reasonable people would agree that bringing a child into a situation where it cannot be properly cared for is an action with much more far-reaching consequences.

But, if you still believe that Republicans are pro-life and pro-family, then they must have other pro-family ideas, right? So, I guess the first thing about being pro-family would be ensuring that all people have access to proper health care. If they’re pro-life, they must support healthy life and access to health services. Wrong. Republicans are adamantly against Universal Health Care. In fact, they are against any legislation that would increase the standard of Health Care in America. Even though numerous studies have shown that the US lags behind the industrialized world (37th as judged by WHO) and has the highest rates of preventable death among 19 industrialized nations (as judged by US Journal Health Affairs), the Republicans would not want to do anything that would jeopardize the profit margin of health insurers and pharmaceutical companies. I don’t know about you, but the fact that more than 47 million Americans go without basic health coverage doesn’t sound pro-family to me. The fact remains that dozens of countries have managed to provide basic services for their people without going bankrupt. The US spends more than any other nation on health care and for what? These abysmal rankings? The Republicans have privatized the health care industry for the benefit of their corporate masters, not once thinking of the American people.

Perhaps a pro-family party would consider universally available day care as a part of its platform? After all, Republicans love that Americans work more than almost every other nation on earth, so they would probably support policies that allow parents to work more. Nope. Except for programs like Head Start, which the Republicans have cut-down each year, there is no plan to support working parents. Annual costs for daycare in America run up to $10,000, an outrageous sum and one that working Americans cannot manage to pay. If America had universally available daycare, rates could be based on income and ability to pay. I’m not even talking about free (or as Republicans will have you believe: Socialist), I’m talking about affordable. And, universally available daycare would pay for itself in the end. Children would be better prepared for school, which would improve drop-out rates and ease the burden on teachers by ensuring all children have basic skills by the time they are school aged. Not to mention the fact that access to proper nutrition cut down on many future health issues. And parents aren’t mandated to send their children, but the option is always available. Now, that is pro-family policy, and surprise, it’s not supported by Republicans.

Perhaps another family friendly policy supported by Republicans is equal pay for women and minimum wage that is a living wage? As we all know, there is an increase in the number of single mothers and, 30+ years after the women’s equality movement, women are still facing pay discrimination. Additionally, women are more likely to be working hourly-wage jobs, so Republicans must support initiatives to ensure that women are paid equally and that minimum wage is a living wage? Unfortunately, no, Republicans don’t support these ideas. They believe in the free market setting wages. Yes, I can see where this would be misleading, since markets fluctuate. But the reality is that in the past seven years, real wages for American have decreased by $1,000, and this during a supposed economic growth period. Well, at least CEOs are doing well. In 2007, the average CEO earned more than 367 times the average worker, not including the approximate $438,342 in unpaid “perks.” This is up from 1989 when CEOs earned 71 times the average salary. And, just in case you’re wondering, the average hedge fund manager earned $657.5 million in 2006, 16,000 times the average salary of $40,000. So, Republican policy towards wages basically amounts to pay the rich, burden the poor, since Americans are shelling out thousands for heath care, daycare, schools, etc. Unfortunately, we’ve seen what this free market policy does for real American wages. Nothing. Corporations won’t pay their people more or equally unless it’s mandated by the government.

Oh, schools! We haven’t even mentioned those yet. I would say that the bedrock of a pro-family policy must be education for the children, right? How can someone be more pro-family than by supporting quality education? One of the greatest American ideas was that public education would be available to all. Lately, and by “lately” I mean “under W’s reign of terror,” quality education has fallen by the wayside. No Child Left Behind (NCLB) has done nothing to address the quality of education, nothing to ensure that American children are prepared for the future, nothing to ensure that children are getting the attention they need. It’s a one size fits no one failure. Special needs children are placed in classes with regular students and no aide because NCLB mandates 100% passing. Teachers are forced to “teach the test” instead of teaching the subject. This standardized test mess is not helping anyone, and it’s hurting our schools and our teachers. American students continue to fall in world rankings, thus making them less prepared for college, less able in the work force and more prone to losing their jobs overseas (because corporations want to hire the most skilled workers).

Additionally, college costs are on the rise, in both public and private universities. The year-to-year increase is about 6%, which is shocking considering that the average wage increase is less than half of that. More and more students are finding college out of reach, and parents cannot save enough to keep up with the runaway costs. I’m not saying that the government needs to foot the bill for every person’s higher education, but it needs to get creative. One great suggestion is a School for Service program that would operate like the military’s ROTC. People could receive scholarships in exchange for years of government service (currently ROTC students owe the military at least four years and service academy graduates owe at least five, depending on the service selected). This would also help bolster the dwindling ranks of public servants. There are ways to make college affordable and accessible, but under the current Republican policies, college is just another way for the rich to make more money from the poor.

My final note about pro-family policies is probably the most controversial, but the most necessary. Family planning services and sexual education are the keystone to a healthy, successful family, but Republicans keep shunning this topic as too taboo. Let’s end the prudeness and get realistic. We need to give our children the best information on the subject possible. Abstinence-only education cannot trump biology. Making family planning and sexual education resources available does not encourage people to have sex. We’re hardwired to have sex, so no safer-sex tools are going to make the inevitable more likely. But, right now we are facing the first increase in teen pregnancy and STDs in almost two decades, and lack of information is the culprit. Being pro-family means having the fortitude to address family planning and sexual education. Purposely keeping people ignorant is not pro-family.

Republicans think that being pro-family means supporting a radical Christian agenda which flies in the face of the Constitution, giving hundred-dollar tax credits to solve thousand-dollar problems, and letting the free market and tax loopholes set working wages, without regard to the actual consequences. Being pro-family means addressing the needs of real American families: health care, child care, education and wages. These are the issues that Republicans will attempt to distort and spin in their favor, but the reality is that their policies are decidedly anti-family. Bottom line: Republicans only care about you until you’re born. After that, they hope you make it long enough to become a cog in their war machine.

Going The Distance

I'm not a distance runner, but I know a few things about endurance. And, I'm pretty sure everyone knows the first rule of competing in a long race: Pace Yourself! You might have a lot of energy in the beginning, you might think that adrenaline can carry you, but when you get halfway there and the novelty has worn off, what is going to make you push on? Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on how you look at it), I did not pace myself for this race. And I know I'm not the only one.

Now, I like to consider myself a die hard politico, but I'm starting to rethink that assessment. In my defense, I had a lot going on in my personal life and with my job, but don't we all? Maybe it was the six week break in which we only heard about Reverend Wright, "guns and bitter", and learned new and different ways Hillary can fudge the math to make it work for her. Those six weeks were the longest of my political life. Nothing changed, but you would have thought that people were battling it out in the polls every night. The talking heads said the same things over and over and over. Luckily, I haven't had a TV for the past seven weeks or so and I've been spared the worst of it (on the flip side, I miss KO like crazy).

And then the races started again. Pennsylvania and Clinton's on the upswing, North Carolina and Indiana put Obama back on top, but can he win the racists and rednecks? (Note: not a particular state, but maybe a particular demographic). And still, nothing's changed. I'm starting to envy the campaign limits of Britain and France.

I think the biggest problem in this campaign is the information itself. Well, not the facts, but the 24-hour news cycle. Or more precisely, the 30 minute news cycle. I had MSNBC on today for about five hours, and except for the Obama speech, the other four hours were the same 20-30 minutes of news rehashed over and over. Enough already! If there's no news, don't pretend that there is. It just makes the TV stations look like morons (or they already are and it's showing) and it frustrates the crap out of Americans. Or, even better, report on the rest of the world. Americans are, for the most part, largely ignorant of the geography of anything past North America. Let's branch out and see what's going on with the other 5.7 billion people on this planet. Oh, that's depressing? Poverty, genocide, and famine? Better turn back to Clinton and Obama.

But, if I could thank one person for making me come back day after day, I'd have to thank John McCain. Almost more than I want a Democrat to win, I want John McCain to lose. I want him to lose embarrassingly. I want him and the rest of his Republican neo-con liars to go down in flames at the hands of 'We the People." I want Americans to stand up and say "Hell no I'm not voting for a lying, hypocritical, old fool who doesn't know crap about the economy and tries to pass off a corporate health care plan under which even he wouldn't be covered! Hell no I'm not voting for a man that didn't vote for Bush but now kisses his ass daily! Hell no I'm not voting for more of the same failed policies! But, mostly, I'm not voting for you because I do actually love America, and not just those with money. Hell no John McCain!"

So, thank you John McCain for reminding me every day of what we're fighting for in this election. I may not have paced myself, but you are the wind on my back, pushing me to victory. We are running away from your failed policies and towards One America!

If McCain Wins, America Loses

If we elect John McCain, America will demonstrate how socially backward, morally bankrupt and politically inept it has truly become. Maybe Republicans want us to vote on who is more patriotic, which is completely subjective. I say that a flag lapel pin doesn’t make a patriot if that person is willing to send hundreds of thousands to death in a false war and simultaneously tear down the very laws that make us free. But, that’s just my opinion. Maybe they want us to vote on who would have the ability to provide cheap (and crappy) beer to America. Keep us drunk to keep our minds off the misery that is Bush’s reality. I guess McCain would win that contest, but as for the actual election, there is too much at stake to waste a vote on John McCain.

First, on the issues of the economy, McCain has continually demonstrated that he does not, in fact, know anything about how our economy actually works. Though he has shown that he is willing to accept how corporate lobbyists want our economy to work. I think this is the most important fact when it comes to McCain’s economy: McCain’s economic plan does not budget for the war in Iraq. Does not even mention it. Does not believe in accounting for the single greatest expenditure in American history. Hello?! For the man who is an ardent supporter of this war, wants to be in the country for, well, ever, and wants to go to war with Iran, China, North Korea, Russia, and probably Venezuela, this budget is a joke. All it does is fling money at wealthy individuals and corporations without acknowledging the reality of our current situation.

So, if that doesn’t scare you, here’s more. We all know that McCain was against Bush’s tax cuts. Why? Because they don’t give enough to the 99.9% of people that actually make up America. Now, he’s for them. Hm, sounds like someone sold out to the ridiculous neo-con perspective (I’ve got mine, screw everyone else) to get the Republican nomination.

And now McCain is pushing a suspension of the federal gas tax, saying it would ease gas prices by 20% (in reality, it’s only 5%, but we know McCain no longer operates in reality). What does he think people are going to do when gas is $3.32 vice $3.50? Yea, I’m not planning that road trip yet, and neither is the rest of America. A suspension does absolutely nothing to address the true cause of these inflated oil prices, corporate greed. Additionally, the federal gas tax goes to support and repair our highways, which are in dire need of maintenance. Not to sound morbid, but maybe McCain should ask the victims of the Minneapolis bridge collapse if they support taking money from highway repair. He would be putting even more Americans at risk of such a tragedy.

In case we weren’t convinced of the utter failure of supply-side economics, there is the sticky little problem of the current economic downturn being “rescued” be demand side policies. Give the people money and they will spend it. Of course, that will only happen if they aren’t in debt already. But, thanks to Bush’s economic policies, we all are. Tax cuts won’t solve it. Deficit spending won’t increase consumer confidence. People will spend money if they feel secure, but right now, we are barely keeping our heads above water trying to cover the basics, not to mention retirement and/or higher education for the future generations. We need a government that will implement policies that help us, and McCain’s policies do anything but.

But, maybe the economy isn’t you’re thing. Maybe you’re more of a rule of law kind of person. Well then, McCain isn’t your guy because he definitely does not support the rule of law, the bedrock of American principles. Foremost is his support for the war in Iraq, which we know was started over lies. However, that doesn’t matter to him. What matters to him is that Americans keep fighting, regardless of whether or not we have a goal or a reason.

Then there’s the troublesome fact that McCain continues to support Bush in all his efforts to restrict the freedoms that make us Americans (those same freedoms that people are fighting and dying for, I assume). And the most important of these would be the Writ of Habeas Corpus, otherwise known as, the ability for anyone who is jailed to appear before a judge and learn why. Now the Constitution says that this cornerstone of freedom may only be suspended in times of “rebellion or invasion,” but Bush just wanted to get rid of it all together. And, thanks to the Republican Congress of 2006, it’s gone. Why worry about the limits of the law when you can just change the laws? Needless to say, I’m more than a little concerned about the serious neutering of the Constitution that has taken place under Bush and that McCain promises to continue.

However, I doubt that these issues will be brought to the attention of the general public. Why would we want to talk about things like economic security and truly protecting freedom (as well as health care, education, the environment, corporate graft, political corruption, the real war on terror, social security, civil rights, I could go on and on)? Why would we want to discuss the issues when we can talk about flag lapel pins and who staffs more lobbyists? Well, probably because the media, following the lead of the Republican Party, is socially backward, morally bankrupt and politically inept. They will focus on God, guns and gays; they will focus on fear and on trivial non-issues to keep us from seeing how truly pathetic American politics has become. Unfortunately, I’m not sure enough Americans will figure it out on their own to keep McCain out of the White House. After Wednesday night’s debate, I saw how the media is going to hand the election to McCain, I just can’t figure out why. If John McCain wins, America will lose.

You Can't Teach An Old Dog New Tricks

When we were younger, there was no such thing as “too much of a good thing.” How could we have too much candy or ice cream? But, as we grew older, we realized that even the good things in life can backfire, and that we must try to achieve balance. We balance the good with the bad and the mundane. If we don’t, we loose sight what makes the good valuable. This election has often come to the question of experience and whose has the most and/or the best. And for me, and many other voters, it’s not the size of the experience, but the quality, that counts.

John McCain is a Cold Warrior. He came of age in a militaristic time and he was a POW in a hot war of cold war principles. He was raised to believe in idea that there are only two sides to any issues; the US versus the Soviet Union, Democracy or Communism, War or peace. This is his fatal flaw. He is simply not equipped to deal with the modern world. He has not honed his skills in discerning shades of gray, and the geopolitical situation today is anything but clearly defined. He will constantly fail, as he has already begun to do, when he tries to dilute complex issues into two sides.

I overheard a political advisor on the Bill-O circus the other day (don’t think I make a habit of watching that clown show) say that all McCain has to do to make Obama look weak on Iraq is hold his “stay the course” stance. The advisor stated that when Obama tries to explain his position, he will appear to “flip flop.” I vehemently disagree with this position (but, I encourage McCain to keep it). The longer that McCain sticks to the black and white situation, the more people will realize that he’s not equipped to deal with the complex issues facing the next president. Just as Bush has gooned everything up because of his refusal to address multi-faceted situations, McCain will be a monumental failure when he continues that policy.

And for the past two days, we’ve been shown what “experience” can give us. Obama speaks the truth about people’s opinions of Washington and points out wedge issues for what they are, and then the “experienced” politicians try to jump in and tell us that we don’t feel bitter, that we’re being condescended towards. If anything, it is condescending to tell us how we feel. If their experience has taught them anything, they would be listening to us, reading our letters and realizing that we are bitter. We don’t want to hear a pretty picture of how they will make it all better. We want someone who is willing to address the issues truthfully.

Because the world is complex, we need a president who is willing to face that reality head on (hell, we need a president who’s willing to face reality head on). No more of this doctored intelligence crap or the politicizing of every issue. We need a leader who has the mental agility to absorb many points of view while keeping the best interest of America, not his checking account, in mind.

So, McCain especially, but increasingly Clinton, have failed my experience test. Too often they have shown themselves to be entrenched in the past, stuck in their old ways. And, all I can see is that their experience will not move us forward. Their experience is only good for how things used to be, not what they are or what they will be. They have not shown themselves to be open to the change we need. McCain and Clinton are the old dogs, and right now, we need some new tricks.