The Changing Demographics and the Backpedaling of the US Conservatives

I read just recently that for the first time ever we're about to have more non-white babies born in the US. It can happen this year, or the next few, but the fact is that the demographics of this country have changed and will change more.  Is this politically significant?

There's lots of speculation about the prospects of the Democrats in the upcoming election in November. Some Repubs are salivating, believing that they could capture the House, at least. They point to the MA special Senate election where a Repub (Scott Brown) took over Kennedy's seat.  There may be a big Repub gain but I'm willing to say it now, way in advance. Assuming there's no new war or terrorist attack, the election will hinge on the state of the economy. 

The conservatives and their loud mouthpieces are creating a lot of noise by being against president Obama and Congressional Dems. They have no new ideas besides worn rhetoric about "freedom" ,"states' rights", security, etc. And, they want to repeal what the Dems have passed through Congress since 2009. A recession or a bad economy with high unemployment isn't good for any incumbent. There will be loses for the Dems, but they may not be catastrophic.


The conservative base is much more excited right now. The doom and gloom--including rhetoric that can lead to violence--can serve them politically in the short term. It's not a good long-term strategy.  

What is the Impact of Political Campaigns?

Campaigns do the following. Energize the party loyalists, bring home the voters that have supported the party before, discourage the opposition from voting, and, most importantly, make connections between the voters' preconceived notions and the candidate or the party.  

Here's a fact: Most people don't change their minds during a campaign. They may look for reasons to vote in a particular way, but being educated about the issues and then rationally deciding what to vote for is a myth we like to tell about our citizenry. A masterful campaign is to make connections between voters' preferences and the candidate. 


Here's another interesting fact: There is more partisanship in the US that we're being told. Even the majority of "independents" have strong leanings. They may occasionally vote for the other party but they tend to identify more with one that they frequently vote for. Some of the INDs are true swingers and often decide elections. They are low-information voters and can be undecided right up to the election if they're exposed to a balanced bombardment from the two sides!


INDs and Swingers have another trait: they tend to prefer a strong leader who may be wrong to a weak leader who may be right!  This is why many of us have been extremely critical of Obama for wasting a whole year trying to be a ..community organizer from the White House.

The Future Has Begun

Ah, I almost forgot about the demographics.  Can you identify any main plank in the Republican platform and core policy proposals that has a long-term future with the changing demographics? Also, if other advanced democracies provide some kind of an example, can you identify those US conservative stances that will be adopted by the majority of Americans in the near (or distant future)?  Things like outlawing of abortion, more theocracy, no regulation of the marketplace, no social safety net, military might over diplomacy, environmental issues, climate change, immigration, rejection of science and the scientific method? Just wonderin'

Jesus Would Be Turning Over in His Grave... As Children Being Raped by Clergy

It's time we keep asking the hard questions even if it makes the majority of people uncomfortable. The longer we keep quiet, the longer we'll have to wait to change a bad situation. It is a systemic problem with organized religion not just a failure in leadership by the current Pope or other church  officials. Covering up crimes was the policy. Has this policy changed? Or, the admission of the crimes and repentance takes place after the crimes become public despite the church's effort to keep them secret?

The cover-up [Memo to Pope Described Transfer of Pedophile Priest] and [Scandal Tests Catholics' Trust] is immense and new cases (those that haven't made headline news already) are being uncovered everywhere the church has a presence. No one knows the exact number, but there are thousands of children who have been molested, raped, and abused by priests--just counting the cases where the Church has admitted responsibility along; probably there are many more. [Here's the article on the sexual abuse of 200 deaf children in Wisconsin, US]

What's unconscionable is that most those priests were known to the church for their pedophilia! But, they were transferred from parish to parish instead of being criminally punished. They weren't event expelled! Now, any other common organization would have gone out of business if it repeatedly failed its "customers" or broke the law in similar fashion.


This raises another interesting point. If the church was serious about punishing the perpetrators, it would excommunicate them; and this would be a good start in addition to calling in the authorities and have them arrested. But, the church doesn't operate like this, and that's why we can't remain silent. I would like to know how many priests have been excommunicated because of their failure to uphold the reputation of the church by committing crimes. Read yesterday's NY Times front page, Warned About Abuse, Vatican Failed to Defrock Priest.


Remember last year when a 9 year old girl was raped by her step father in Brazil? She became pregnant, but her small body wouldn't be able to carry a baby. She would have died if the pregnancy continued, so an abortion was performed. The Brazilian Archbishop, with the Vatican concurring, excommunicated the ..mother and the doctor. No, the rapist wasn't!


The Pope can instruct his followers that the foundation of their faith is obedience to the church, not what Jesus said. Obedience and fear are the staples and the means of control. Oh, and the devil. Yes, the devil plays a very important role--obey or he'll destroy you! OK, he can be under the Fear category too.


Further, Catholic church doctrine holds that the Pope is infallible in matters of faith. Somehow, a man who was complicit in covering up the rape of children got divinity when he became the Pope.  He received more wisdom by donning new robes and becoming in charge of a palace--the Vatican--that also doubles as a sovereign state. Martin Luther was on to something when he said the church and priests were unnecessary.


The former Cardinal Ratzinger, currently the Pope, is the same person who told Africans that AIDS is indeed bad but condoms are worse! He condemns abortions but also condemns birth control--those family planning methods that are effective unlike the rhythm method. 

He and many other religious leaders are fit for the Dark Ages, and it's unfortunate that they are the spiritual leaders of 21st century humans. It's no wonder why we have so many people who not only don't understand science but don't want to either. The same people who opposed the current health care legislation because it could provide funds for abortion--never mind if there was a case where abortion was deemed by a doctor as a medically necessary procedure.  Care to guess which people are against sex education, birth control, and evolution theory?

In a few days, Christians will mark Easter--the most important Christian holiday. I know many who are decent human beings, really nice people who care about their neighbors. I'm not talking about them. I'm focusing on the ones who have taken Jesus in name only and have used dogma to turn this world into a worse place... all in the name of Jesus.


Like the tele-evangelists who have to buy a new Lear jet with your money in the name of Jesus, of course. Like those clergy who claim to be experts in knowing the word and will of the creator of the universe!  This creator presumably gave us a brain with which to reason! But, it seems the religious authorities don't want us to think. Faith--accepting dogmas with no evidence or reason--is the currency upon which the flock of sheep is organized and preyed upon. It's no wonder why the rewards for the faithful will come in the afterlife and not in the real world today!


We must ask the tough questions and try to infuse more reason into our social discourse. We are capable of governing ourselves through reason as mature, responsible adults without fear being the motivating factor. Of course we are not perfect but we are not (nor should we be) governed by original sin. We have evolved.

Fear is is the foundation of religion. It worked for primitive peoples but we deserve better nowadays. The shackles of the body are being broken everywhere, although the shackles of the mind still remain intact. Where's religion has more power, the stronger those bonds are. 


Shouldn't, at least, an Almighty protect the innocent children in his own house? Why did he allow children to be raped by clergy that supposedly serve Him? Or, is child rape punishment for the sins of parents?  If either is true, then I know, I can't worship any deity that makes these allowances or tests faith in such a manner. Of course, the religious authorities peddle fear to paralyze us into obedience and prevent us from asking reasonable questions. Once we start questioning their "wisdom" we may come out of the self-imposed delusions and stop paying money & respect to them. 


Who knows, we may eventually become less afraid of an angry, jealous, vindictive, genocidal, racist, homophobic, ethnic cleanser, and misogynistic God. Or, that we may discard the god we made in our own image back in the Iron Age and finally move into world of reality and humanism without primitive superstitions.


I understand this post will make many people uncomfortable and angry. I wonder what Jesus would say if he was around...




Update: Various links on the child abuse and the church.

It's Time To Be More Vocal Against Ignorance, Stupidity, and Bigotry

It's not about free speech--a principle we must defend. It's not about the right to hold any opinion. It's about time to put an end to stupidity and ignorance. Our polity doesn't improve if we remain silent about the fear mongering, the peddling of superstition, and bigotry. 

This is an excellent editorial by Bob Herbert in the NYT. Here are some excerpts:

 

At some point, we have to decide as a country that we just can’t have this: We can’t allow ourselves to remain silent as foaming-at-the-mouth protesters scream the vilest of epithets at members of Congress — epithets that The Times will not allow me to repeat here. 

It is 2010, which means it is way past time for decent Americans to rise up against this kind of garbage, to fight it aggressively wherever it appears. And it is time for every American of good will to hold the Republican Party accountable for its role in tolerating, shielding and encouraging foul, mean-spirited and bigoted behavior in its ranks and among its strongest supporters.

For decades the G.O.P. has been the party of fear, ignorance and divisiveness. All you have to do is look around to see what it has done to the country. The greatest economic inequality since the Gilded Age was followed by a near-total collapse of the overall economy. As a country, we have a monumental mess on our hands and still the Republicans have nothing to offer in the way of a remedy except more tax cuts for the rich.

This is the party of trickle down and weapons of mass destruction, the party of birthers and death-panel lunatics. This is the party that genuflects at the altar of right-wing talk radio, with its insane, nauseating, nonstop commitment to hatred and bigotry.

Glenn Beck of Fox News has called President Obama a “racist” and asserted that he “has exposed himself as a guy, over and over and over again, who has a deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture.”

Mike Huckabee, a former Republican presidential candidate, has said of Mr. Obama’s economic policies: “Lenin and Stalin would love this stuff.”

The G.O.P. poisons the political atmosphere and then has the gall to complain about an absence of bipartisanship. 

A party that promotes ignorance (“Just say no to global warming”) and provides a safe house for bigotry cannot serve the best interests of our country.

Ignore the Right-wingers and Do the Right Thing: Pass Health Care Reform!

Today, 3/21/10, the House votes on an extremely important piece of legislation on the path to universal health care coverage in the US. This bill is far from perfect, and I have been on the fence because it is not comprehensive enough, however, as an important step it must pass.  Finally, the president is showing some leadership on the issue. He also chose to use the Democratic majority to get things done--slow learner, but maybe he understood that the sole aim of the Republicans is to obstruct and to make a disaster out of any Dem initiative. The GOP knows that the voters won't give a passing grade to Obama & the Dems just for trying!

Universal health care is something any advanced democracy (where the government acts on the public interest) should have. It makes sense, it promotes longer, healthier, happier lives. We can save more lives and reduce suffering through this than by spending on ..armed defense more than the whole world combined!

A sticking point for some conservative Dems have been whether public funds would be used for abortions. Abortion should be a decision left to the individual woman who should have access to all legal medical services without irrational and ideological restrictions placed on her and her doctor.  Unfortunately, there are some religious stiffs who have a problem with sex. Yes, it is about sex as they define it. Reproductive choice, they argue, should not be an option!

There is some very interesting news regarding this issue. After Massachussetts passed its health care reform, the abortion rates when down. Furter studying of this is necessary but here are some observations:

• the knowledge that her child will have access to health care may reduce abortions; MA Medicaid provides help to the poorest women to have an abortion but even so abortions went down in MA.
• with regular, affordable check ups, women can make better choices, including birth control.
• in other countries there's a strong correlation between abortion rates and the strength (or absence) of health care; the US ranks highest among advanced democracies.

We often don't have debates on the core issues; I understand it's not always possible to start from square one.  If a person believes that human life begins when 2 cells meet, then they'll oppose any method that prevents the 2 cells from ..carrying on. Science illiteracy is another factor. What's strange is that the same people who oppose all abortions--including methods that are not abortion--also oppose contraception, access to it, and access to birth control, sex education, and any social/medical services associated taking care of newborns.

But, I suppose it's the Biblical principle that dictates the children pay for the sins of their parents...

To the opponents of reform: Is health care a human right or a privilege? Should the US save the lives of tens of thousands of Americans by extending coverage to those who don't have health care and/or are under-insured?   The answer will determine the kind of society we are.


PS>This OpEd by NYT columnist Nicholas Kristof is a worthy read. 

What Would Jesus Say About Social Justice in the US Today?

Have christian values changed over the years? Is it because there's been an evolution of thinking and changing times? Or, is it because certain scriptures have been interpreted wrongly? Whatever it is, Glenn Beck may have put his foot into his big mouth by equating social justice with communism, fascism, and everything he thinks the progressives stand for. Maybe the rest of the media isn't willing to take on the Fox Network for the latter's distortion of journalistic standards, but many people of faith are now taking on this fool.
There are many conservatives who have placed a higher value on capitalism than on social justice, so Glenn Beck isn't an exception. I wonder what Jesus would say about the current state of wealth inequality in the US. What would he say when Americans suffer personal bankruptcy, unnecessary pain and early death because they don't have health insurance. Or, that there are close to 10 million children living in extreme poverty and go to bed at night hungry; or that 1 million of them are homeless in the wealthiest country on earth!

It's been said that there's not  much logic in religion, but I think it depends how religion is perceived--from the inside (believers) and the outside (the secularists). The insiders are divided into two groups. One of those who use it as a guide to be better moral people; the other is of those who use religion to justify their actions.

The outsiders are also divided into two groups. One of those who think religion can (not always, as we know) be a force of goodness. The other of those who think that religion has shackled human reason and progress. 

At any rate,  the notion of a social contract is that free people enter into a civil society and establish government in order to promote the welfare of all people, not just the few. So, what's happening in our country?....

Public Debate on Health Care: It's a Trap if You Have Nothing Meaningful to Say!

President Obama has invited the Republican leadership to a televised discussion on health care reform, but the GOP and their allies say this is a trap! Well, sure it is! The conservatives will be trapped in a room with cameras and they'll look like fools because they have nothing meaningful to suggest in terms of health care reform. They'll stick to the same slogans about "government takeover," and why we should avoid "socialism" at all costs!

Here's how they do health care in Hawaii (is that territory part of the US?) which appears to be under an oppressive socialist regime. We are all going to die if Hawaii's health care experiment (last 40 years) is implemented on the mainland! Or, at least that's what the Republicans want you to believe...

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
The Apparent Trap
http://www.thedailyshow.com/
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

Mississippians Turn to Iran for Health Care Help

Meanwhile in Mississippi there's a problem with infant mortality [according to CIA Factbook] whose death rates compare to an impoverished Third World country. But, Mississippians are free primarily because they have been voting for leaders who have successfully reduced or eliminated government services. However, they have to be more vigilant nowadays... It seems that some traitors have turned to Iranian doctors for advice on how to reduce infant mortality in one of our poorest states!

Barbara O'Brien has written a very interesting article on Mississippi's health state. She also points out Mississippi's tort reform as having no serious effect on controlling costs. This is important because the conservatives keep arguing that tort reform (reduce lawsuits & damages awards) will fix the problem of the rapidly rising costs of health care. Here's her other article on the ..Iranian involvement in Ole Miss.

A Pale Blue Dot... The Only Home We've Ever Known. Happy Valentine's Day!

Suspended in a light beam... this tiny pale blue dot in a vast universe was photographed on February 14th, 1990, by Voyager from 4 billion miles away as it was speeding away.




Listen to Carl Sagan's poetic description of our Earth. February 14th has always been a big more special for me since 1990. When I think of the infinitesimal time & space I occupy, all remnants of pettiness and unnecessary worries melt away. Once I realized how lucky I was to just be around, I decided to live the rest of my life alive!

"..it has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience.There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another, and to preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known." Carl Sagan

The Hypocrisy of Republicans: They Won't Support Obama Even if He Adopts Their Own Proposals!

As I've been pounding the point here, it's a waste of time to try to negotiate with someone who has nothing good to give you. Obama's effort to be a team player has fallen on deaf ears because the Republicans aren't interested in being on the same team, not even support the positions they had recommended before!

They will keep calling Obama a "socialist" even though the most money he has given so far has gone to the banks, Wall Street, and big business!

Here's a great clip from the Rachel Maddow show on the hypocrisy of Republicans titled, "They Are Not Embarrassed."

No, Not Another Government Takeover! Government Should Stick to Giving Lots of Money to BIG Business Only!

You'd think it would be a no-brainer that instead of the US government giving money and guarantees to the lenders of student loans it could give the money directly to students or to colleges. Of course, that's "government takeover" and we know how free we want to be. Right? That's the argument, like soup de jour, being used by the freedom-loving conservatives today. Don't get me wrong, I often order the soup of the day--which has a different substance and flavor from place to place...

Of course, I don't want the government to take over my civil liberties, but if, as we proudly claim, the government is of, by, and for the people, our government has to provide equal opportunities to the people to reach their own potential. Freedom is connected to action, but without any good choices freedom doesn't mean much. If I'm only free to read, say, do "whatever" I want while being locked up in the basement, then this is not true freedom.

Likewise, I'm not free to pursue higher education if the price of attendance is out of my reach. Being free to choose from lender A or lender B isn't a good option if it means that either choice will bankrupt me by graduation day.... Assuming I could get those burdensome loans to begin with.

Four months ago, it appeared that Obama's proposal to overhaul the student loan business would materialize, but, guess what, the lobbyists haven't given up. Now, how would they succeed in stopping a sensible proposal [yeah, I know, they've done it many times before, stopping good legislation from going forward] in Democratic-controlled Congress? Want a wild guess? Money is buying votes in a climate of failed Democratic leadership to get things done.

Now that SCOTUS has ruled corporations have the same First Amendment rights the sky is the limit. Lots more corporate money will be available to educate the public now. It won't be long when corporations will obtain Second Amendment rights too.

I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that there's a critical mass of the American public that supports politicians who work against the public interest. Also, the phrase, "government takeover" apparently motivates millions of Americans to defend their freedom of choice to remain toothless!

The Dems Must Repeal Social Security, Medicare, and All Social(istic) Programs!

In Hopes of Getting the Support of the Republicans! That Would Fulfill Obama's Holy Grail of Bi-partisanship. Middle-of-the-road Politics Today, Roadkill Tomorrow! Everybody Wins (except the country)

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Blues Clueless
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

"The Republicans are f@**ng with you! They'll never going to let you in the station wagon." Jon Stewart

I watched the SOTU address (no drinking game this time*) and the Repub response last night. Obviously, in principle, Obama comes much closer to my values and priorities than the conservatives who, at this point, are somewhere in the outer boundaries of the solar system (yeah, that's far out).

But, despite Obama tailoring his speech to appeal to the fluid independents the reality is that he and the Dems have not provided the kind of leadership the country wanted by giving huge majorities to the Dems since 2006. Yes, the lost decade left a heap of troubles and huge deficits before Obama walked through the WH door. No reasonable person would expect a total reversal in just a year, but judging from the way he and his party conducted themselves so far, well, it's pathetic.

I'm afraid they'll take the wrong message from MA and move to the center in hope of getting in the ..car that they own! It's not going to be a successful strategy, for the following reasons:

• They will lose the support of their most energetic base--the grassroots and the progressives
• They will never get the Republicans to support them. Unless the Dems bring back the failed policies of the previous administration or the disastrous conservative policies: freeze spending across the board excluding defense; continue tax breaks and no tax increases for the wealthy class and big business. All these will not benefit Main Street, only Wall Street.
  
• They will lose the independents who are not ideologically attached to a party and don't like weak leaders or nothing good coming out of Washington.
• Did I mention that Republican-lite isn't the flavor of the moment?
• If the Dems give up their mandate for change (yes, change the status quo--when more and more Americans believe that "the fix is in."), then they might as well return to the status of the minority to wail and make noise without having any responsibility to do anything. In short, give up CHANGE, and they'll get a CHANGE of regime in Washington DC come November and again in 2012.

*

“Obama took all his winnings and turned them over to Max Baucus.”

Massachusetts Doesn't Want to Pay for Nebraska's Health Care!

That's right! Massachusetts has a more progressive health care system than what's being floated in Congress, so they voted for Republican Brown who opposed the federal version. Also, Coakley=terrible candidate, deserved to lose--even though I would have voted for her.

Here are a some more facts. MA is a "blue" state that predominately votes for Dems, but the majority of its voters are registered independent. Dems outnumber Repubs 3-1, but even Dems can cross party lines, as they did with Brown, 18+ %. The latter was a great campaigner who rode 2 waves and 1 low tide. One, the anti-Washington/big business/banks sentiment; two, the independent voters; three, Dem voter abstention. Did I mention that Coakley professed ..atheism in the church of Red Sox!

The independents and the Dems who broke for Brown by huge majorities think the health care bill is a bad one because it doesn't have a public option, or a single-payer, and it doesn't do anything to control the costs. Besides, Washington wasn't going to give them anything they didn't have already; if others states want what MA has, they should pay for it themselves...

Some other random thoughts that come to mind: A Democrat who's Republican-lite isn't very successful as voters go for the real thing. Many people would support, stick with a bold leader who's wrong than with a soft leader who's right. Bi-partisanship isn't possible with a party of "no." It doesn't mean much if you waste a year reaching to the other side but ultimately fail to produce anything good. It's good to try to build coalitions when you're a community organizer, but when you're the president you have to make decisions and move Congress and public opinion.

Consequences of the Republican Victories

One year ago, this past January 20th, Barack Obama became the 44th President of the United States, following a tremendous reversal of political fortunes. Within 2006 and 2008, the Republicans lost the Executive and control in both chambers of Congress... and lost them big! Obama had very sizeable majorities in the Congress. Oh, in case you have the impression that those majorities are gone, it's not so! The Dems have a 256-178 advantage in the House, and 57-41-2 in the Senate! Of the 2 independents, Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is good, while J. Lieberman (I-CT) should be told to go to hell. The following should also be sent to purgatory: Lincoln (D-AR), Nelson (D-NB), Baukus (D-MT), and Landrieu (D-LA). As you can see, the mark of 50 is easily met, and with VP Biden much good legislation can take place.... IF there's good leadership.

To the salivating Republicans: You are still in the minority, and even though the Dems are doing a splendid job of screwing up, your party isn't gaining more than the people's frustration with the slow and ineffective Dem leadership. Your party is falling faster. Anti-incumbent sentiment, a bad economy, high unemployment--all predating Obama and current Congress--don't automatically translate into Republican supporters. Don't believe me? Good. Then keep doing what you're doing. Actually, embrace more the tea-baggers, the Sara Palins, the Limbaughs, and their cohorts.

"Let me see if I've got this straight: the only people who have fully recovered from the financial meltdown are the ones who caused the financial meltdown. And by recovered I mean apparently re-dipping their balls in gold."
---Jon Stewart

I think the Dems defeat in MA was like a mild heart attack that got the patient to the emergency room and may have prevented a fatal hearth attack in November. That is, IF the patient understands what needs to be done from now on. Thus, this minor problem can be a warning and not a death sentence. Further, the Dems can realize that they have to govern like other presidents who had fewer Senators and Reps, or even being short of the majority. A good signal now would be to tell Lieberman to get lost by stripping him of his committee chair.

I hear that the progressive Dems want to scrap the current version of the health care bill, simplify it, and offer a public option. Look, the current bill will cover millions of Americans who have no health insurance. BUT, it doesn't control the costs. This is UNSUSTAINABLE. Costs have been rising much, much faster than wages. I have good health insurance. My premiums have gone up and instead of my employer giving me raises, they pay higher and higher premiums too. It's not good for business, and if the US is about being competitive, well, we're aren't as much as we could be.

I hope Obama is a good and fast learner. He hasn't played well in the first quarter and his team is hurting. This year is his second quarter before we go to halftime (midterm elections). He has to pick it up quickly, because in this sport last quarter heroics are usually a sign of desperation and the "hailmarys" don't work.

PS>What's the matter with those Southern men who have extra-marital affairs and they lie when confronted about them, look us in the eye and deny something that they know will eventually come out. At least here in the Northeast, we have men who admit to their indiscretions! Clinton (D-AR) and Edwards (D-NC) denied their sexual trysts only to be doubly shamed later. At least our own gov. Spitzer admitted it when the allegations came out. Same with current gov Paterson who admitted cheating on his wife. Yeap, the institution of marriage is safer when same-sex couples are denied equal rights.

UPDATE, 1/22: This memo is interesting to read and basically makes many of the same points argued in this post.

UPDATE 1/24: New York Times Frank Rich's editorial is right on point. That's exactly what I've been saying. Here are some excerpts:

It was not a referendum on Barack Obama, who in every poll remains one of the most popular politicians in America. It was not a rejection of universal health care, which Massachusetts mandated (with Scott Brown’s State Senate vote) in 2006. It was not a harbinger of a resurgent G.O.P., whose numbers remain in the toilet. Brown had the good sense not to identify himself as a Republican in either his campaign advertising or his victory speech.

The president is no longer seen as a savior but as a captive of the interests who ginned up the mess and still profit, hugely, from it...

Worse, the master communicator in the White House has still not delivered a coherent message on his signature policy. He not only refused to signal his health care imperatives early on but even now he, like Congressional Democrats, has failed to explain clearly why and how reform relates to economic recovery — or, for that matter, what he wants the final bill to contain. Sure, a president needs political wiggle room as legislative sausage is made, but Scott Brown could and did drive his truck through the wide, wobbly parameters set by Obama....

Ask yourself this: All these months later, do you yet know what the health care plan means for your family’s bottom line, your taxes, your insurance? ...

[Obama] has stepped up the populist rhetoric lately — and markedly after political disaster struck last week — but few find this serene Harvard-trained lawyer credible when slinging populist rhetoric at “fat-cat” bankers. His two principal economic policy makers are useless, if not counterproductive, surrogates....The White House clearly knows this duo is a political albatross. ....

It’s become so easy to pin financial elitism on Democrats that the morning after Brown’s victory the Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee had the gall to accuse them of being the “one party who bailed out the automakers and insurance companies.” Never mind that the Bush White House gave us the bank (and A.I.G.) bailouts, or that the G.O.P. is even more in hock than Democrats to corporate patrons. The Obama administration is so overstocked with Goldman Sachs-Robert Rubin alumni and so tainted by its back-room health care deals with pharmaceutical and insurance companies that conservative politicians, Brown included, can masquerade shamelessly as the populist alternative.

...

Can anyone picture Obama exerting such take-no-prisoners leadership to challenge those who threaten our own economic recovery and stability at a time of deep recession and war? That we can’t is a powerful indicator of why what happened in Massachusetts will not stay in Massachusetts if this White House fails to reboot.

...

The smartest thing said as the Massachusetts returns came in Tuesday night was by Howard Fineman on MSNBC: “Obama took all his winnings and turned them over to Max Baucus.”

It Doesn't Feel Like 2010 Ushered a New Decade Yet... Are We Stuck in the Past?

Oh, How Perceptions Change... Like the Definition of Marriage!


It doesn't take me too long to talk about politics, even in ..polite company. Why not, important decisions are being made that affect our lives and the lives of future generations. I have to admit though that my interest is there because I care about the outcome of policy not because I'm satisfied with the process and the results. I consider myself a very progressive liberal, a secular individual--which, at least in this country, puts me in a small minority. I have hope that "my side" is winning and things will turn our way... it's just the pace seems to have the speed of molasses.
Funny test I took online today, based on cases that have been decided by the Supreme Court. I scored 92% in agreement with justice Stephen Breyer!

This new year started with lots of problems for our country. The president and the Dems have managed to produced a health care bill [at least the current one being discussed in Congress] that most Americans don't like or understand. The public and the single-payer options favored by the majority of Americans aren't even on the table! The progressive base and those groups that helped the Dems wind big in the last 2 elections are either disappointed or not very enthusiastic. The GOP registers higher motivation among its faithful and this might be enough to bring it some success this year.

One seat the Dems should not lose next week is Ted Kennedy's old Senate seat. Strangely, president Obama isn't going to campaign for Martha Coackley! On the other hand, I think it will be good for the Dems to lose seats in the Senate this November. The "magical" number 60 will be no more, so there will be a true test of leadership to get things done without ridiculous compromises to get votes from Lieberman, Nelson, Lincoln, Baucus, and Snowe (she never came through despite being declared the unofficial president last summer!).

So, Sarah Palin knew nothing about history or foreign policy or much about anything else--other that "it was God's plan"--when she was drafted as McCain's running mate. I guess now she'll dispense her wisdom working for Fox News. But, considering Fox's audience, she'll fit right in... along with Brit Hume, who urged Tiger Woods to convert to xtianity in order to redeem himself from his sex scandal. Whatever.

What's rather offensive is the conservatives' revision of history--that the Republicans kept the US safe. Even Giulliani forgot that Bush was in office for 9 months (and ignored Islamic terrorists) when the terror of 9-11 happened. When president Bush froze when he was told that "America is under attack." When the neocons started another war on false pretenses and taking the focus away from Afghanistan. When, in essence, the Bush-Cheney-neocons triad managed to divide our friends and uniting our enemies. Conservatives have been bad for national security. I just hope that the American people have better memories.

On the more amusing side of the spectrum, the Vatican condemned the popular movie Avatar as " simplistic....flirting with modern doctrines that promote the worship of nature as a substitute for religion".. OK. I haven't seen the movie, but I kind of like the idea of relating to something that has a physical existence and we can interact with than to imaginary friends and foes. But, that's me. Choose your own poison, as they say.

To recap, 2010 will be an interesting year with ups and downs like any other. Glad to see a Democrat in the White House and Congress not controlled by the crazy wingnuts. Enjoy the ride in good health.



Update: I found this gem. With leaders like these...

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Hey, does it mean if these people don't get their way God is not on their side?

Imagine a Better World. May Happy World Become a Reality Soon

First, may we all have a happy new year! I thought I should start this new year with a positive post, so I'm going to talk about pleasure--one of the two masters (the other being pain) according to the utilitarians like Jeremy Bentham and J. S. Mill. Most would prefer pleasure to pain and maximizing the former is a moral stance. Should societies try to advance the conditions that make people happy? This is a serious question.

Now, what do you think of freeloaders? Those who want to get something that results not from their own efforts but by the efforts of others? Why should anyone be coerced to give up the fruits of their labor? As long as those fruits/benefits came from legal activity and an open/free marketplace. Right? Besides, who can really determine who needs what and what does a person deserve?

Yet, voluntary contributions may be necessary to preserve and enhance a society. Because, everyone benefits from a good, stable, progressive, healthy, educated, happier society! No one operates in the vacuum of space, nor do they make their wealth over there. Now, what's voluntary? Is it a social contract we're part of?

Personally, I think the definition of pleasure should be left to the individual who should be in charge of themselves. However, there's a great value, a higher moral standard, to support conditions that allow individual growth but also a positive social growth. The trick is to find the proper balance. Individualism and a progressive society aren't mutually opposites. On the contrary, this is the essence of liberal democracy.

As for pleasure in the new year, I'd like to see more people pursuing fulfilling activities--as long as they don't impose on the rights of others. For example, they can devote all the energy, money, and time to worshiping god(s) or the sun or whatever else they feel it makes them happy. I'd like to see healthier people--and we know how to do this if we have the political will.

I'd like to see more people thinking rationally because they appreciate the quest for knowledge and understanding, without surperstition and prejudice. I'd like to see more humans cooperating instead of fighting on illusions and pettiness. During the next trip around the sun, on spaceship Earth, let's remind ourselves that, for a long while, we have no where to go except to exist within a narrow band of a small planet in a hostile universe.

Finally, I'd like to image this...




In essence, I support the conditions that make me happy... and, I believe such conditions give opportunity to others to pursue their own bliss. Have a great year ahead!

Progressives to Obama: Mr. President, Please Explain Why You Changed Your Mind on Health Care.... [and, a reminder of what Obama used to say]

We have an obligation to remind the president what he was saying not so long ago. He must explain to us why he's failed to set the agenda on health care reform. Why he has been so accommodating to the likes of Nelson, Baucus, Snowe, Lieberman and the insurance industry? The progressive base gave the impetus to his candidacy. The majority of voters wanted change--which meant anything but Bush, and ultimately, good reforms that would benefit the middle class and the poor. Well, where are those reforms? Those reforms that would come from exercising leadership and spending of political capital, not the easy ones from signing executive orders.


When candidate Obama was campaigning for the presidency, he was rejecting the plans offered by Hillary Clinton and McCain. He stated that he wanted a public option as the best way to control costs and make the broken system competitive. Now, we hear, he's ready to sign on to a reform that does not include a public option.

The current system is unsustainable. Premiums, co-pays, deductibles have risen much, much higher than wages, while the costs of providing health care have skyrocketed. The Senate version of this bill will cover more American but what does this mean? Can you be covered when you can't afford the co-pays or the high deductibles? Further, if you get help to do so, then we're shoveling lots of money to the insurance companies who will keep doing what they've been doing and have more customers with public money!

It's insane that our leaders don't address the following shameful fact: The US is the only advanced democracy where patients (and their families) can go bankrupt because of medical bills! The majority of bankruptcies in this country are due to medical expenses. Of those, 3/4 have had "insurance." It's insane.

Listen to this interview on WNYC public radio. It's a critique of the suggested changes.

A Study Case of Failure in Leadership. Yeah, it's the Democratic President & Congress! [Can They Recover?]

WARNING: The following video is funny. (oh, and it uses ..pedestrian language). Buffer the video if you don't have a fast internet connection.

F the Vote

Should every American have equal access to quality health care? This is the only question that matters in this debate. As for the money a proper universal coverage would cost we can certainly afford it. It all depends how we spend the money. Of course, if we spend 50 cents on the dollar for military purposes, they we won't afford it, but clearly it's an obvious matter of priorities.

Any number floated out there by proponents or opponents to reform sounds good to me. Let's say it's $1 trillion for the next 10 years? So what? It's $100 billion a year to cover 300-310 million Americans. It's probably less than $1 a day for each of us! Meanwhile, we're all charged five times that much for military expenditures. Are we buying so much more security--the kind that saves lives like proper and available medical care? We spend more that the whole world combined on military, yet we are not as secure, and, by the way, we aren't as healthy as other advanced democracies! But, we have a system that's heavily influenced by people who don't share in the burdens. Leaders send the kids of others into battle. They have great health benefits that the rest of us, apparently, don't deserve! And, they set up huge corporations that enjoy the profits in private pockets while the risk is often socialized!


We've tried the private insurance approach it hasn't worked. Like it didn't work when NYC had private fire companies. The health care system has failed 1/3 of the people in this country--either because they don't have insurance or they're under-insured. We all pay for this mess, well except for those few who rake in huge profits. This is the only advanced country where you can go broke (bankruptcy) because of medical bills. It has failed to contain costs and increase meaningful competition.

The health of the community is important. The other truth is, the current system is unsustainable. I work for a big private non-profit organization and we all have medical insurance through a private for-profit company. Our premiums have risen way faster that our wages. This has been the case since the 1970s, thus, the middle class has seen dramatic increases in the cost of housing, education, and health care. Actual wages (adjusted for inflation) have remained stagnant.


If this Congress passes a monstrous bill and president Obama signs, it will be disastrous--not only for the Democratic party but for our country since millions of Americans will be without health care, the costs will not be contained, competition won't improve, and young people (18-29), who are now heavily pro-Dem, will be forced to buy into a bad and expensive system or fined if they don't. Why, do you see a problem with this? Yeah, the future's so bright I got to wear shades..

Oh, wait, there's some good news from this! You can make lots of money by buying insurance stock! Have your noticed that their value has been going up since we got news of this great bill negotiated by our leaders?!!


UPDATE: I like Paul Krugman. He's an unabashed liberal and I usually agree with him. But, this economist and Nobel laureate makes the case for passing the rumored health care bill. I may not agree with him, but here's his piece:


"A message to progressives: By all means, hang Senator Joe Lieberman in effigy. Declare that you’re disappointed in and/or disgusted with President Obama. Demand a change in Senate rules that, combined with the Republican strategy of total obstructionism, are in the process of making America ungovernable.

But meanwhile, pass the health care bill.

...

At its core, the bill would do two things. First, it would prohibit discrimination by insurance companies on the basis of medical condition or history: Americans could no longer be denied health insurance because of a pre-existing condition, or have their insurance canceled when they get sick. Second, the bill would provide substantial financial aid to those who don’t get insurance through their employers, as well as tax breaks for small employers that do provide insurance.

All of this would be paid for in large part with the first serious effort ever to rein in rising health care costs."


There's a split among the progressives on what to do with the bill the Senate wants to pass. Some, like Krugman, say pass it now and amend it later. Others, like Howard Dean, say no!




On more thing. When will the Dems obtain such big majorities in both chambers of Congress plus the White House? Just wondering... I mean, if they can't pass meaningful reforms now, when will they? They'll be blamed for the financial troubles next year, especially if the unemployment figures don't improve. This is a great chance in a long while to pass good reforms that will benefit most of the people for generations to come. There were the same reactions and vapid opposition to new progressive programs like Social Security, Medicare, consumer protection, civil rights acts, and even electrification. This new president and Congressional Dems must rise to the occasion and do what's best for the country, now and in the future.

Is the Near Future as Good as the Present?

Maybe New Models Are Needed

As students, we didn't think all that far ahead; of course we were concerned about the future but we firmly believed in the American dream--the world was there for us to take. It's been quite some time since I graduated college, and many things have changed, but also many haven't. The middle class hasn't advanced all that much, if at all. I went to a public university so I managed to get my degrees while accumulating little debt. However, most students today graduate with a huge amount of debt--a figure that's rising about 6% a year. Project Student Debt has the numbers for graduating seniors. [pdf] The most debt-laden students are in the Northeast!

The employment prospects for graduates reflect the overall state of the US economy. Yet, US workers' productivity has increased while wages haven't followed the trend. Since 1973, real wages have remained stagnant! Read Elizabeth Warren's America Without a Middle Class to find out more. The presence of a strong middle class is very important in a stable, progressive, and fair commonwealth. Unfortunately, most of the wealth is amassed and held by the very small elite that has been using the political system to its advantage. The corporate media hardly talks about the distribution of wealth and usually distracts the audience with cheap, mindless entertainment.

I don't know whether the American people have begun to re-evaluate the conditions in our country, but there's a sense at present that the "fix is in." They believe that Wall Street is more important that Main Street, and that the government primarily serves the wealthy and powerful. On the other hand, there are too many of us who prefer myths and distractions to reality. For the life of me, I don't understand how voters elect most of the Republicans in Congress today--such a conservative bunch that has no intention to do anything good for the common folk, from consumer protection to equality of opportunity conditions. Or, that Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and so many others, have tens of millions of listeners! This does have a tremendous effect on our national dialogue and on public policy.

Now, on to education. Did you read Bob Herbert's editorial in the NY Times? He argues that the greatest national security issue in the US is the crisis in education. This isn't too far fetched, you know. Within the span of one or two generations, the effects of a largely uneducated public, the lack of real opportunities, and the lack of economic growth that matters to most people can be explosive. An empire that's losing power can also be a very dangerous thing. I could see how demagogues can convince the American public that our woes are not our fault by the fault of others, and that we must act unilaterally against our enemies! Always confusing the issues and transfer blame.

In the end, we'll collectively get what we deserve. What do you think we deserve in the near future?


Here's a popular American explaining American history and providing a solution for a better country:

Celebrating Charles Darwin and the Human Thirst for Knowledge

This year is a special one when it comes to celebrating our quest for knowledge by marking the 200th year of Charles Darwin's birthday and the 150th year of his seminal work on evolution--the theory that explains the mechanism by which we are here today. Most of the world in 1859 was not very scientific, which makes Darwin's discovery even more remarkable. His theory of evolution has been ferociously attacked since the day Origins was published. I could understand those who didn't have the benefit of an education in science or anything else, but to deny one of the strongest scientific theories we have today is rather incredulous.

Once, briefly, I accepted biologist Stephen Jay Gould's notion of "non overlapping magisteria," that is, science and religion address different domains, and, therefore, claims made by these magisteria cannot be reconciled nor should they be compared. Not so, I contend today. Denying evolution, for example, is based on religious claims--a priori statements that cannot be subject to evidence or reason. This is crazy! Claims about reality must be evaluated. Religion and science both make such claims.

Think about it. They want to subject scientific theories to scrutiny by throwing some verses from ancient books at them. Darwin investigated, observed, collected evidence, established a theory that could predict, and as scientific theories go, there's a way to disprove it. Yet, disproving a strong theory must be done with evidence and reason. Darwin's basic theory of evolution has been confirmed by several other branches of science--unknown to the humans in the 19th century. Now, we have religious fanatics who refute this because they believe a book that was written a few thousand years ago is the absolute truth. They want to believe what ever suits their needs--and placing humans at the center of creation (of the whole universe) must feel good. What an arrogance!

The worst part of this is that they want to spread their ignorance through the public education system! Oh, and they have this expensive but utterly stupendous creation museum... where they show the Biblical version of evolution. This version has vegetarian dinos strolling around with humans. Since the courts have declared that creationism is not science, they try to label their religious doctrine as "intelligent design." Fortunately their trick hasn't worked... in most states. In some state schools, creationism is considered as an alternative theory to evolution--you know, for balance. Or, as our former president GW Bush said, "the jury is still out"...so, teach both sides to a story. Like, teach alchemy to balance chemistry, astrology to astronomy, magic crystals to medicine.

I don't remember when I had my epiphany of reason and how I escaped with my curiosity intact, but I realized early on that education was how to better understand my own self, the human condition, and the cosmos. Alas, the more you know, the more you realize there more unknowns. Yet, the journey continues. Actually, reality is far more exciting, like the hidden colors in the visible light that are revealed by refraction! Why should there be a supernatural realm?

There's got to be a need of some sort that makes so many humans disregard reason and science. If they don't know any better, they may have a good excuse, but if they live in an advanced society they have no excuse. The powerful dictates of a culture inculcated by religion make strong shackles of the mind. By looking at US politics, one might say that ..devolution is also possible. On the other hand, our knowledge is increasing at an accelerated pace--much like the galaxies are speeding apart at an increasing rate.. ..well, except that the bigger Andromeda galaxy is heading our way on a collision course with the Milkyway.

On a more positive note, the average life of a species is about 2 million years, so by the law of probabilities, the human species may have a few more years of life left. You wouldn't know it by looking at the abundant life around us, but the Earth is a deadly place--indeed many forces in the universe are hostile to life. Some 98% of all species that ever appeared on this blue planet have been extinct. Most life is brutish, painful, fearful, anxious, poor, and short. Pain and suffering has been a constant. Some design, heh? And, if this was a laboratory to do testing on live specimens, it would have been shut down in any self-respecting society or under a moral entity.

What has elevated humanity is our ability to think, to reason, to be creative--more so than other species. We have choices to make; we can even create our own choices including our destination. But, perhaps the most amazing thing is the journey itself and the process by which we move through spacetime.

Sarah Palin Should Run for US President in 2012, and 2016

I thought of giving you my review of Sarah's book, Going Rogue, but I opted for this video of her admirers instead.

The Meaning of Education and the Timidity of Certain Minds

What is that You Want to Know?

It doesn't happen that often--maybe because students don't care to say anything about it--but occasionally someone in class would argue that some comments/discussions about certain belief systems are offensive and disrespectful. The other day, a student said, "I don't pay thousands of dollars to have my beliefs insulted." Presumably she meant that certain topics should be off limits because she's uncomfortable with anything that may undermine her sacred beliefs. She pays thousands of dollars to get an education--in my opinion, education means more than vocational skills--but is she interested in paying for an education that sharpens critical skills? How about, the value of arriving at a conclusion after examining the facts and weighing the validity of the arguments?

The piece of paper a university awards should mean that the title holder has critical skills, can analyze, can amend, construct reasonable arguments, connect the relevant dots, and, yes, maintain a curious mind. How about learning something that may be outside one's comfort zone? Is this valuable?

Now, on the question of respect. As a principle it's a good one: respect every individual's human dignity; respect their rights; respect their claims to own conscience and opinion. But, why should their beliefs be granted automatic respect? Yet, denying automatic respect to a point of view does not mean people don't have the right to have whatever opinion they deem appropriate or their right to express it. Simply put, I do not recognize any right of de facto respect. Opinions, theories, belief systems should be evaluated on their merits. How can anyone demand that such be afforded sacred status? What's sacred for me may be laughable to you, and I'm OK with that! So, should you!

To take it a step further, if you claim sanctity for your beliefs, it may be an indication of weakness. Instead of having the force of arguments to defend your views, you rely on censorship for protection. I realize that many people don't want to be challenged so they seek supporting views only. Of course, this is their right. Of course, it's their right to feel any way they want. They can create filters and avoid places that present challenges. However, they should be prepared to have their views tested when they enter an institution where intellectual pursuits involve critical examination of ideas and beliefs.

How do we know things? Seriously, how do we know if something is true & valid? Maybe I should ask instead, do we care to know?

If we do, then the scientific method is the best tool we have to understand and accumulate precious knowledge! This involves open discussion, challenges, reason, evidence, review, and a way to amend.

I'm naturally suspicious of claims of divine revelation. I don't think profound knowledge or truths should be revealed only in secret and to a very few people. Especially when such statements can't be put to a test or subject it to an intellectual challenge. As someone claims the right not to be offended, I claim the right to free speech and rational thought. Above all, I claim the right to be human!

And, that's my theory!

Teabaggers, Faux News, Loons, and Republicans Who Promote Lies & Ignorance

Today (Nov. 12, 2009), several members of Congress, including this loon Michele Bachmann, and conservatives from all necks of the woods are descending on Washington DC to "scare Congress" into scrapping the health care reform. I think this video will give you an idea of what those "teabaggers" are and what they want. Sadly, this is the kind of crap promoted by Fox Network and other conservatives--who have taken control of the Republican party.

Sometimes, the best way to debunk stupid arguments is to give more publicity to those who make them!