A Few Reminders to President Obama...

Even if the choice between Obama and McCain, including their respective parties, was very clear in the last election, we can't be happy with several actions by the sitting president--who has maintained the failed and even illegal policies of the Bush administration.

Many of us were inspired and greatly motivated by the rhetoric of candidate Obama and the striking differences to the Bush-Cheneys he pronounced. So, what the hell has happened???!!!

All progressives have to keep Obama's feet to the fire. "All the power you didn't like when you didn't have it ... now YOU decided to keep it"..

Respect My Authoritah
www.thedailyshow.com

As for the election in November, two things can happen. Either the Dems will maintain a narrow majority in the House or it'll go to Republican control. Wasting one year on health care reform and wasting his political capital falls squarely on the president. He took his electoral winnings and gave them to DINOS and the GOP to squander.

He's seen as slow to react in the BP disaster, and the general view is that Obama doesn't have a clear policy. Again, the country prefers leaders who are strong but wrong, to weak/indecisive but right. 

The economy is also a big factor, and it will greatly influence the outcome of the November elections. There are signs of improvement but this has to be "felt" by most Americans. It can't be a jobless recovery or one defined just by a Wall Street rise.

A Curious Life is Worth Living

I have lots of questions but not as many answers--I realize how little I know, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. To those who've been visiting here since 2004, it's obvious that I have some strong opinions. Yet, I'm truly interested in the truth, the facts, and I believe I'm able to change my mind without feeling stupid for adopting another point of view. Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinions but not to their facts.  We can disagree based on our values and priorities but there's got to be some mutually accepted reality.

Now, that's the problem: How we perceive reality, methods of acquiring knowledge, and standards of evidence. Fortunately, we do have methods of inquiry and logic. Unfortunately, they are often discarded in lieu of confirmation bias, lack of interest in asking questions, and personal identity issues.

Since at least the ancient Greeks, we have the fundamentals of reasoning and the scientific method but even after thousands of years and many civilizations later we don't seem to want to learn. We still cling to primitive taboos, superstition, and willful ignorance. It's very frustrating to see a preference for old inadequate answers to some big questions. Many students aren't interested in learning other than the basic mechanics of a profession that will enable them to become rich... That's how most young college students perceive their efforts.

Perhaps it's only in the US where a highly advanced country with lots of scientific talent and research has such great numbers of people who are basically anti-science. That's why in several states (yes, where religion is the strongest) they're still debating about the validity of the theory of evolution--one of the strongest scientific theories we've got!

At any rate, for those of us who are awed by the richness of the universe and the thrill of scientific exploration, it's worth watching Brian Cox lecture at Ted. Enjoy--as I know you will.

" Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there--on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam"

 Carl Sagan on the occasion of the Voyager taking a picture of Earth in 1994, 4 billion miles away.

God, Gays, and Guns.... And, Government...

Remember Bobby Jindal's response to president Obama's first State of the Union address?  Why do we spend millions of taxpayer money to monitor volcanoes, he asked, and that there's nothing Americans can't do on their own!  Then a volcano erupted... I'm sure you've heard of the recent oily mess off the coast of several states whose voters think Jindal's view of an impotent state is right on the money.

The conservatives keep saying that the marketplace can take care of the bad actors in it. Yeah, right. They say that bad, unsafe practices will be punished by the consumers and the court system. Of course, this doesn't happen because we know it hasn't! Bad practices, including illegalities aren't necessarily bad for business. Especially BIG business. Wall Street gambles, screws up, and what happens? Too big to fail comes to my mind. 

The people in charge of making decisions are rewarded with huge bonuses and golden parachutes. Their companies are "too big to fail" we're told. Often the end result is: privatizing the profit and socializing the risk. Capitalism for most of the people, socialism for the rich.

The government should be the expression of the public will and it should act in the interest of the people not the few elites. Guess what? The conservative rhetoric has managed to disorient too many Americans who believe "government takeover" means less freedom! Obviously, government is not the solution to everything. Nor, that the government cannot be abusive. Yes, it can. 

Yet, in an advanced democracy the government's role is to empower and protect. Who really needs this? The marketplace can't do this. Equality of opportunity, safety (workplace and individual), and consumer protection have not come because private business saw it fit to do so.  It came through collective action and government passing laws often in the face of visceral opposition from the big business interests and their political ally--the US Republican Party (20th century on).

Who should protect the public interest in the month-long ecological & economic disaster of the BP oil leak? Guess whose interests are served when the government regulators are absent. Or, that the law (passed with the help of lobbyists) limits the oil industry's liabilities to a few million dollars?  And, why did the oil industry got huge tax breaks (while the government failed to collect royalties for it) while it was making record profits?

The T-baggers are angry at government in general--and some of their anger is justified--but their anger is only matched by their misunderstandings & misconceptions. We need better government that serves the commonwealth, not the interests of those who have lots and want more.

By the way, who's going to protect me from the gun-totting tots who want to walk around and go into coffee shops, restaurants and bars professing their Second Amendment rights? I thought we left behind the Old West lawless frontier, and we decided that a civil society has found other means to protect itself than having everyone carry guns everywhere.

Yeah, God, Gays, and Guns...  {who said this?...}

Primary Election Results Show Divergent Paths for Dems & Repubs.

Some interesting results from yesterday's primaries where the most active/interested party members participate. Granted the turnout is usually low for such elections, but it's an indicator of the base's direction and mood.

The Dems defeated party switcher Arlen Specter who's been a senator from PA for the last 30 years. Specter had been endorsed by the Dem establishment and president Obama. There's a runoff election in Louisiana where the incumbent conservative Dem Blanch Lincoln will have to face a more progressive Dem for the nomination. Both of these events are good.

The two parties spent millions of dollars to win Murtha's seat in PA (he died recently) in a very conservative district. The Dem won but the two partisans will face off again in November. We got a Blue Dog DINO here, but his opponent is far worse.

Another interesting development in KY where an extreme Teabagger won the Repub nomination. The Democrats may have a better change of winning the Senate seat in a conservative state in November, hopefully--if Kentuckians have any sense left.

Not a Mainstream Party Anymore?

As I've said before, the Republican party has moved far to the right because of the pressure it has from wingnuts. But, the Republican leadership (and its mouthpiece FOX) is responsible for promoting such lunacy. Unfortunately for them, that political base is rather small, especially nation-wide, and it's not getting bigger.  But, it seems that in order to get the GOP nomination, the path goes through the crazy land.

John McCain, back in 2000, understood this and he decided to become a much more conservative politician since he wanted to get the presidential nomination. He did and he picked Sarah Palin as the cherry on a stinking old pie.  Now, Newt Gingrich--the disgraced former Speaker of the House--is seriously thinking of running for president.


"The secular-socialist machine represents as great a threat to America as Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union once did"

Asked whether such remarks [from his book and public statements] are a over the top, Gingirch  responded, "No, not if by America you mean the historic contract we’ve had which says your rights come from your creator, they’re unalienable, you’re allowed to pursue happiness." Gingrich should know the history of our country. Our constitution begins with, "WE THE PEOPLE". The rights and political system we established here came from human authors. Nowhere in the constitution the word "god" is mentioned nor that the rights come from divinity. Happiness, by the way, is pursued only if there are appropriate conditions that allow it. Equality of opportunity is a fundamental principle of our polity but it's easily forgotten by the conservatives and those who want to maintain a system that works best for the small upper class.

Guess what? He's jumped on the loony wagon too. Obviously, if that's what some people want to hear, that's what they want their leaders to say, but it is very disturbing to have this kind of political discourse in the 21st century USA.

A Country Where The Lunatic Fringe is Still at Center Stage. Where?

We have way too many loons in this country, and unfortunately the have ..critical mass so they are a force that steers our polity into the wrong direction. Several recent events have showcased something ugly about our society.

One. The love of guns. When the framers of the Constitution thought of the "right to bear arms" all they knew was the technology of the 18th century. In that time you could carry a musket and a knife. In our times this right definitely doesn't mean ownership of attack helicopters, bazookas, F16s, and nuclear warheads. For the life of me, I don't understand why so many Americans don't want any restrictions on gun ownership. We have members of the US Congress that say a known terrorist shouldn't be restricted in buying AK-47 assault rifle, even though such person is on the no-fly list and can't board a plane.

What kind of a country do we want when we allow every person (usually without any background & mental checks) to own & carry openly? In the reality of the frontier strapping one on your hip was perhaps necessary but at some point civil communities decided that it was better for pubic safety to have law enforcement do the gun totting. Now in certain states, persons can carry guns to coffee shops, bars, and everywhere else! Sure, I can't imagine a problem with this. 

Guns are openly displayed by angry men at political rallies too. Have you noticed the violent rhetoric of those idiots? How about the rhetoric of their leaders and other irresponsible talking heads? "It's time to re-load," and "put the cross-hairs on the target," the Sarah Palins extort us!

Can you imagine the reaction of the wingnuts if blacks were using the same rhetoric and carried guns to demonstrations & political rallies?...

Two. When Congress tries to pass comprehensive health care coverage, the usual suspects cry, "stop government takeover"!  At least 10 states are suing arguing that the latest health care bill is unconstitutional! Yet, the other provisions of the Bill of Rights--like due process--are ignored.  Did you see a poll that suggested most Americans approve of the new Arizona immigration law? Geesh.  On suspicion of being  an unauthorized immigrant, the authorities can detain you if you don't have the proper papers. Nice. We're safer now, aren't we? But, what are those crimes we should be really concerned about?

The criminals who infiltrate our borders don't come over to steal a job from an American. They're hear to satisfy another demand: illegal drugs.

Speaking of terror, why should we shred the Constitution in the illusion that we'll be safer? Provisions that give suspects (and, yes, criminals) certain rights are there to protect the rest of us. Due process, legal representation & procedures define our system. The would-be Times Square bomber (whose smoking SUV was spotted and reported to the police by a couple Muslim street vendors) is cooperating with the authorities. Same with the Xmas airline bomber who became cooperative because of the proper (and civil) treatment he received. No torture has been necessary.

Three. We have a unquenchable thirst for energy and for petroleum. I'm told that it's our g0d-given right to use resources like there's no tomorrow, but something has to be done about it now. Funny thing, some states that are more pro offshore drilling are feeling the ill effects of the BP disaster in the Gulf.  Kudos to the guvernator of CA that changed his mind after seeing the catastrophe.  

But, why worry about the environment when Jesus will return in the near future? I'm not kidding. The majority of Americans believe that the messiah will make an appearance in their lifetime (next 30-50 years?) at which point you can kiss the world goodbye! Yeap, and the Theory of Evolution is just a guess--this is the belief of the majority of our countrymen. Sad.

PS/Update (5/10/10): Just is case you think the lunatic fringe is limited to just a few disgruntled individuals...  I don't believe that all conservatives or Republicans are stupid, bigots, ignorant, selfish, and mean. No, but the loons are most likely to be conservative and Republicans. Unfortunately, the GOP has shifted way to the extreme conservative side in order to appeal to such people.
Take for example the second populous state, Texas, and the state Republican party there. Here's the Texas Republican Party platform--their official ideology & policy proposals. Yeah, this is where much of the GOP is located today.

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.