Who is our government for? The people, the corporations, or religious groups?

There has been a steady progression in this country that has landed us in this very unfortunate spot. Originally our founding fathers created a blueprint for our country that strove to strike a balance between the types of controls that are needed to create a civil and ordered society, and the individual liberty and freedom of the common person. In those days, that quest for freedom was primarily borne from forced religious doctrine and monarchal whims & taxation.

Today we face the very evils that our original young country rebelled from, and over the last 60 years we have sown the seeds of corruption and defeat into our system, and forgotten the intention that our founding fathers had for our country.

This problem is endemic, and comes from many angles. First, our founding fathers could not have seen the rise in mega corporations, as most industry in those times were smaller private ownerships. The concept of a world wide mega corporation was something not on the radar. It would have been equally as impossible for them to make some form of constitutional framework regarding the exploration of the moon. So our founding fathers understandable lack if prescience has left a system that's been easily subverted by money.

And so it is. Our political system has very little to do with the original founders intentions of preserving freedom and liberty for individuals, and now is very much for preserving the wishes of the highest bidders, which almost every time, is a corporate interest. There are no citizens lobby giving campaign contributions, taking politicians out to lunch, and buying them vacations in order to preserve the health, welfare, and liberty of the average person. But there is a motivated daily influx of soft and hard money that slowly bends every politician to the whims of business.

Take the health care industry, as an example, since we're on the verge of introducing some sort of corporately benefiting public health care plan. (an oxymoron to be sure) For every congressman there are 4 health care lobbyists trying to persuade them to favor the industry over the individual. Last year over $24 Million was given in hard donations to politicians, that does not include the soft donations of under 100$ such as lunches and dinners. $14 million of this years total contributions to politicians has been from the health care industry alone, and we're half way through the year. This is an industry that sees a system that is NOT broken. As a system that relies on money donated in order to keep their jobs, how could ANY politician not acquiesce to the desires of those giving them the money. It's not the politicians fault really, they are just playing by the current rules. "I need to pay for my campaign to continue my job and so I appease the people that give me the most money." Unfortunately that is never someone looking out for the individual.

And so we have a country that has turned into a Corporatocracy. That is not very different from what our founding fathers sought to rebel from. Increasingly our populous is being dumbed down and taught to worship the ideals of capitalism over democracy, consuming rather than producing, and praising ignorance over intelligence. At the same time that corporations rose to stratospheric levels of power in this country, religious groups have sought to subvert their own influence and control of factions of the government and education. We have evidence of clear religious dogma being insinuated into the various political institutions happening around the 50's, and then with historical revisionism being presented as examples of how we are and always have been a christian theocracy.

Currently these factors are playing out as they have been for years. The shining examples being our upside down position on individual health care rights vs. corporate health industry profits, C-street type religious factions creating secret religious orders within our elected officials vs. the rights of the people to have representation without secret agendas, and the old yet persistent fight in this country for all people to have equal rights.

The US ranks 37th in the world for adequate health care delivery.

The US ranks 30th in life expectancy.

The US ranks 34th in infant mortality.

The US ranks 11th and 9th on Science and Math respectively.

But the US ranks 1st in "defense" spending.

We spent 623 billion dollars for our military expenditures in 2008. That ranked us #1, it was a close race though, China came in at #2 spending 65 billion.

Our Government is owned by corporate greed and the principles and intentions of the founding fathers have been murdered. With the continued dumbing of our citizenry, and the constant overt corporate control system in place we will never fully realize the promise this country once had. The kind of change that needs to happen in this country can't happen, since the people that need to benefit from the change have no real power, and there are no longer men of intelligence and virtue around to effect it.

Palin - "Need more time for hunt'n!"

So the good news is Sarah is leaving public office and going to concentrate on, well she has trouble concentrating, so she hasn't really said what she's going to do. Maybe she's going on to make some hot and heavy GOP porn. And while sex scandals are definitely thinning the GOP herd, if she sets a precedent for resignations based on stupidity, then the GOP will surely be empty soon.

With porn though, I think she'd make enough money to cover her multitude of legal and ethical charges she's facing. It seems like the republicans I know only vote for gay, sex starved, pedophiles and aren't actually those themselves, so there's probably a good market for straight sex porn involving Palin. Better sign her oldest daughter too just in case though. I've read its in excess of $500,000 worth of legal fees she's up against. But I've also read that she's managed to twist and distort some compensation rules and siphon some extra money off the top of her job. Things like claiming living expenses while staying at her own home, and claiming expenses for trips for her children.

No wonder she LOVES Alaska, and all the good people there, they've been paying her a pretty good salary with lots of benefits they are only just now finding out about. And with this abrupt resignation, no matter what story you believe about it, there is one thing for certain, its because she is running for the presidency. You can see the heavy handed mental drudgery of this attempt written all over it. Mired in a bunch of political ethical scandals, she'll bow out, hopefully allowing most of the law suits to be dropped or fizzle quietly off the public stage. She'll try to rack up some "real" grassroots experience. You know something better than a community organizer, cause those people are true idiots as any FOX watching red blooded NORMAL American knows. Then she will announce a partnership with a true American hero to be the great phoenix born GOP powerhouse for 2012.

Thank god. The Democrats never had it so easy. Well once, but shhhh.

I'm not that happy with some of the things that Obama is doing and saying lately, but I'll tell you this, his worst day is preferable to her best. Her brand of self entitled ignorance is not only destructive to us domestically but on an international level it is the epitome of disaster.

The only thing to worry about is if the GOP actually wised up, and backed someone like Ron Paul. But then they'd actually be putting their so called conservative money where their mouth is, and as we learned last time, the GOP isn't about playing it straight, its about pretending you do.

Sex, Politics, Religion, and Republican Hypocrisy

See the thing is morals are important. I think few civilized and intelligent people will try to dispute that with a straight face, but the problem lays with the people that want to preach that, or even worse, legislate it. Over the last 15-20 years we’ve seen the increasing sermonic viewpoint being shifted into our political system, and that has both dire and humorous consequences. Most importantly its brought constant media attention to the relentless hypocrisy of the vast majority of politicians that hold their religion and morals to their sleeves.

I doubt there is little arguing with the fact that the Republican party is THE “Christian party” and yet, even though they are the chosen ones representing not only their constituents but their faith, as they love to remind us in every speech they seem to make, they still fall on their morality sword time and time again.

Now I’m the first person to line up and say I don’t give a flying rats ass if anyone, let alone a politician, sleeps with anyone. Its frankly human nature, its unfortunate for the jilted partner, but most people on this planet sleep around. This is nothing new, and its not going to stop anytime soon. Where my hackles get all anti-gravity is when people in power, who publicly make a life preaching the value of their moral righteousness, then go on to try to enact policy against what their faith believes to be sin, only to commit the exact sin they rail against.

I think this is a mental disorder of the most heinous kind, and it infects the Republicans, Politicians in general, and Religious Right like a disease.

Look at some of the most recent examples of these moral crusaders:

Newt Gingrich - His outspoken moralizing over impeaching Clinton for lying about getting a blow job is somehow questionable when he was during that time, cheating on his own spouse with a 20 year younger woman, whom he later married as wife number THREE. Currently he’s touring around trying to promulgate how gays are going to ruin traditional marriage and how secularists are trying to destroy our traditional Christian society.

Somehow, I think that if Gingrich wasn’t a lying hypocrite, he would see that its his own lifestyle behavior thats ruining his country and religion. So in this case I judge his mental instability as Projection.

Mark Foley - How embarrassing is this once Republican poster boy? Yet doesn't he sum up so much of the self hating hypocrites that fill his ranks? Who is our Republican and Christian bastion for protecting our children from sexual predators? Low and behold, a same sex predatory scum bag, looking to harass underage boys.

Not surprising really.

Larry Craig - Here’s a confirmed bachelor that also publicly deplored Clinton during his impeachment saying, “Bill Clinton is probably even a nasty, bad, naughty boy.” As if that shouldn’t have put the warning lights on? His most notable bullshit hypocrisy was when he supported the Federal Marriage Amendment, which barred extension of rights to same-sex couples, only to later be caught in an airport sex sting, targeting homosexual liaisons in airport bathrooms. Really? Yeah, never saw that coming.

Eliot Spitzer - Not a repub, but definitely a hypocritical scumbag politician. His well publicized crackdowns on prostitution rings was only too perfect of a lead up for his boomerang conviction when he was found guilty of patronizing a high end brothel.

And most recently:

Mark Sanford - This God fearing and bible quoting moron voted for the Clinton impeachment following the Lewinsky scandal, declaring Clinton's behavior to be "reprehensible.” Not only does he moralize with the bible in his hand, he also uses it as a defense for his own reasons to not resign as Governor, quoting:

"Immediately after all this unfolded last week I had thought I would resign - as I believe in the military model of leadership and when trust of any form is broken one lays down the sword. A long list of close friends have suggested otherwise - that for God to really work in my life I shouldn't be getting off so lightly."

So in this case, his God thinks its OK, and hard work doing what you were doing is the best medicine for this, but just for you Mark, just for you. Any other cock-led moron committing adultery should be impeached, and or resign. OK.

So the problem here is how politicians do and say opposite things, invoking religion when it suits them, when it helps them stir up the religious fervor and support. Cause no one cries louder or more often than those that hold the religious books, and like a miracle, those religious texts can condemn and shield the very same thing. Hypocrisy.

This list could be 4 times as long for sure, but there is one more that is standing out in plain view to me and that is:

Barack Obama - Specifically the most hypocritical issue he’s facing right now is Gay Rights. For the historical impact that it is for a black man to be voted into the highest office of this country and not be a visible and vocal champion for human rights in this country is more than shameful. It tarnishes the long fight for equality that African Americans have fought for, instead of brandishing the sword of equality, it shows that freedom from marginalization comes only to those in power. For Obama, a citizen of that long repressed and marginalized community to raise to this level of power and not overturn the Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, which denies federal marriage benefits to same-sex couples is reprehensible.

And so in a long line of Politicians, he too stands by “what’s good for me, is not for you.”

Welcome Sociopathic Sock!

Okay kids, now you've gone and done it! You've made me resort to outsourcing! I'd like everyone to welcome a new author who is a personal friend of mine, Sociopathic Sock, also known as Gilbecrake. I don't think I've known anyone longer than this guy (20+ years), he's a superfreak, genius, nobel nominee, vag magnet, city-dweling elitist. If you thought I was a liberal surrender-monkey, just keep your bowels in check and a rain poncho close by, because the proverbial sh*t is about to hit the fan! Well, let the games begin!

Why is the private system so great?

We've had a private insurance health care system in the US for over 40 years with cost increases of 2-3 times the rate of inflation for every one of those 40 years. We've had a public system in place for those over 65 for about 45 years, that cost has increased at about 50% of the rate of inflation over those same years. Can someone tell me why? And don't give me any of that malpractice crap, it's already been shown time and again that that is less than 1 percent of overall health costs.

Personal Health Care Experience

Wow, my last post created quite a discussion, so I thought I would chime in with my own personal experience with our "wonderful" health care system.

My previous wife past away almost 2 years ago from a long-term illness she had been battling for over 10 years. During that 10 years I was fully employed and had employer provided insurance (and it was pretty decent coverage on the surface). However over the course of that 10 years I had paid out of pocket expenses totaling over... wait for it, it's a big one... $200,000! That's right, enough to pay for a nice modest house, and that's with insurance! The bulk of that was paid during the last 4 years. How is the average American expected to deal with that?

I had to fight my insurance provider every step of the way with their pre-authorization requests, and other tactics. They would deny procedures and treatment based on all kinds of reasons that are too long to go into here. The point is, they were in control, not me, not my wife, and not our doctors! What are you supposed to do when the insurance company denies coverage of a procedure, forgo the procedure? We are talking about a person's life here! Most of the time I didn't even have that option, I usually found out they weren't going to pay for something after it was billed by the doctor/hospital. They put every effort into trying to prevent giving you the very coverage you are paying for. So those of you who are afraid of a public health plan because you think the government is going to take control over you and your doctor, I have news for you, you're not in control now. It wouldn't matter if the US did have the most advanced medicine in the world since damn few people can ever get it, even if they have "great" health "insurance".

So my question for those who are opposed to any type of government run plan, are you prepared to outlay the same type of expenses for yourself or family member that I did? What do you do if you lose your job, as millions of Americans have in the past several months, can you afford the COBRA costs with your unemployment check? Don't be naive and think it can't happen to you.

WE NEED HEALTH CARE REFORM NOW! WE NEED A PUBLIC OPTION NOW!

Hate Mongering

Watch the following clip of Shepard Smith.



Nice insight into the minds of, as Sarah Palin would call them, "real Americans" out there. This crap started during the election and has continued to grow ever since, and guys like Sean Hannity, Michael Savage and Glenn Beck have been fanning the flames of this craziness. If you think I'm wrong, just do what Shepard Smith's guest suggested and spend some time on the blogs. As a matter of fact, start with Sean Hannity's own forum on his site where this kind of rhetoric is a daily occurance, or look back on last summer's campaign trail.

The difference between John McCain and Sarah Palin became clearest in the middle of the campaign last summer.

At a town hall meeting, McCain was confronted by an elderly woman who told McCain that she was a supporter of his because Obama was "an Arab." McCain was clearly uncomfortable, and it was patently obvious why. It had nothing to do with McCain's feelings about Arabs. It had to do with an old-school Republican accidentally moving the rock, and coming face to face with what actually lived beneath it. He recognized that the woman was making an unambiguously racist statement about his opponent, and he was mortified to be asked to answer it.

The Republican party has been hijacked by racists and religious fanatics who deride education and achievement as "elitist." Sure, they might only be a small portion of the party, but they certainly are among the loudest!

Sarah "Screw the Political Correctness" Palin, on the other hand, seemed right at home. She marched into those same crowds grinning and winking, and "Yoo betcha-ing" like she was onstage at the Miss Alaska pageant. While her supporters waved watermelon slices and stuffed monkeys, Palin talked about who the "real Americans" were, and who was "palling around with terrorists." She refused to address the blatant racism of her fans, or address the obvious exploitation of Obama's middle name, Hussein, and the implication she herself was making with her "terrorist" comments.

One can almost appreciate the horrible honesty of the racists among the McCain-Palin supporters who were able to admit what the others obfuscated: that they didn't want a black man in the White House. Certain videos from their rallies are deeply disturbing. They showcase the seething racism and hate of her most ardent followers.

Obama's citizenship was reportedly also something of an obsession for James W. Von Brunn, and likely very much on his mind when he walked into the museum and opened fire to make a statement about what "his" America ought to look like. It's not hard to conclude which radio stations he listened to, or which pundits best represented his baseline political ideology.

I think the scariest part of the video above was the tail end which gets caught in the audio fade. Smith says, "More and more it seems people are taking the extra step and getting the gun out."

Missed Opportunity

Today I learn of yet another instance where compensation restrictions that could have prevented the AIG bonus blowout were ignored!

Senator Ron Wyden said on Tuesday that the furor surrounding AIG's bonus payments could have been avoided had the Obama White House and members of Congress simply backed legislation that he and Sen. Olympia Snowe introduced more than a month ago.

In an interview with the Huffington Post, the Oregon Democrat noted that during the crafting of the stimulus package, he and his Republican colleague from Maine introduced a provision that would have forced bailout recipients to cap their bonuses at $100,000. Any amount paid above that would have been taxed at 35 percent. The language made it through the Senate, but during conference committee with the House, it was inexplicably removed.

"The reality is, had that legislation been passed it would have been a very strong disincentive to anybody paying out bonuses in the future," said Wyden.

AIG Bullsh*t!

I'm sure everybody has heard about this fiasco by now! This situation is infuriating on so many levels, I don't even know where to start!

Let's start at the obvious place, AIG itself. Do these Wall Street people ever learn a lesson? It was excessive greed that got them into financial trouble and they continue to reward that greed with taxpayer-funded bonuses. The head of AIG, Edward M. Liddy, and the US Treasury tried to justify this outrage by stating that AIG was under contract to pay these bonuses and might be sued if they were not paid. To combat this argument, I give you this...

On March 15 NPR reported the union of the employees of the San Francisco Chronicle agreed with management to renegotiate its contract to allow the company to fire workers without regard to seniority, work longer hours than the contract called for, and take fewer paid days of leave.

Contracts can be renegotiated! You may say, "Well the union had no choice, as the paper was on the edge of bankruptcy." Well, AIG is in the same place.

The worst excuse I have heard is, "We cannot attract and retain the best and brightest talent to lead and staff the AIG businesses... if employees believe that their compensation is subject to continued and arbitrary adjustment by the U.S. Treasury." Can you believe this? If our current economy and the fate of AIG is the result of "the best and brightest talent" we could only hope they would quit if they didn't receive their undeserved bonuses!

Bonuses are for performance. Any contract that grants executives bonuses whether or not they deliver, even when they drive their corporation off the cliff, is a violation of the corporate board's obligations to the shareholders. Such contracts should be renegotiated, surely as a precondition for receiving public funds, which brings me to the next part of my rant...

Is anyone buying the politicians' bullsh*t outrage? First off, Obama says that Tim Geithner, Treasury Secretary, has "stepped in and berated them (AIG), got them to reduce the bonuses following every legal means he has to do this". Yet Geithner himself tied his own hands back in February when he successfully fought against more severe limits on executive pay for companies receiving government aid. He resisted those who wanted to dictate how banks would spend their rescue money. And he prevailed over top administration aides who wanted to replace bank executives and wipe out shareholders at institutions receiving aid.

The Bush administration, the Obama administration and Congress had numerous opportunities to attach limits on executive pay to legislation authorizing bailout money, and everytime, they refused or watered it down. They easily could have put conditions on the bailout money. They could have capped salaries and bonuses. They could have taken these companies into bankruptcy, where the executives would not be legally entitled to their salaries or bonuses.

Now the Obama administration is trying to make them pay back the $165 million in bonuses as a condition of receiving the next $30 billion in federal aid. Who are they kidding? Let me see if I understand this, if AIG gives the government $165 million, they get $30 billion in return! Where can I make that kind of deal? Can AIG just have it deducted directly from the $30 billion?

I've really tried to be patient with all of this, but I think it's time to stop screwing around and nationalize these institutions, kick out the "best and brightest talent" and start over! I don't think the American taxpayer can endure much more of this!

The Crisis of Credit Visualized

Here is a great video that I think does an awesome job of explaining the current bank implosion. This is a must watch!



The Crisis of Credit Visualized from Jonathan Jarvis on Vimeo.

The only thing I would add to this is that it leaves out the governmental impact. Everytime a home was sold, the property would be reassessed, meaning higher tax rates that were then transferred to state capitals and thus borrowed against in the form of bonds. The bonds were then used for public works, deferred maintenance, and other projects. The federal, state and local governments wanted additional revenue streams and wanted more home owners to buy bigger and more expensive homes causing homeowners to get into greater debt.

Politicians kept quiet.

There Is No "Trickle-Down" Economics!

How many times does this have to be discussed? How many different ways does this have to be presented? Just recently Brit Hume of FoxNews was making the classic argument that the top 5% of income earners pay like 60% of the taxes and that the share of income taxes paid by the higher income people over the years has not gotten smaller under the Republicans, it's gotten larger. Blah, blah, blah!

Well, no crap! The reason for this is simple, Americans are earning less and less each year. The median household income over the last 30 years hasn't kept pace with the economic output of this country.

The Reagan-style free economy is not great for most Americans, eventually. Bubbles and credit expansion can only hide the truth only for so long.

Even by then, was it difficult to see through the rosy numbers? Why does this graph have no political impact?

US Defense Spending vs The World

I want to take this time to put in perspective just how much we spend on defense. If you look at the chart below, you'll notice that we outspend everybody in the world by several times over! Is this really necessary considering all that money did nothing to stop a few terrorists on 9/11. I think to realistically attack the national debt, we are going to have to look towards the Pentagon to do some serious cutting. It was Dwight Eisenhower (a Republican) who warned us of a "military-industrial complex" when he said

"This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence - economic, political, even spiritual - is felt in every city, every State House, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources, and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society."

High Speed Rail Confusion

Let's clear up this high speed rail thing for Mr. Jindal of Louisianna. If he's going to complain about something, he should probably make sure it really exists in the first place.

The Stimulus Plan includes two provisions modeled after the Act that finance high-speed rail development. First, the Stimulus Plan provides a $2 billion grant for high-speed rail projects that will remain available until September 30, 2011. The grant will be distributed among applicant states, interstate compacts, public agencies having responsibility for providing high-speed rail service and Amtrak for capital projects associated with inter-city passenger rail services reasonably expected to reach speeds of at least 110 miles per hour. The Secretary of Transportation will have discretion to award grants based on an extensive set of criteria, including the legal, financial and technical capacity of the applicant to carry out the project; compatibility with relevant national plans; and anticipated economic, environmental and transportation effects.

Above is a map from the US Dept. of Transportation showing high-speed rail designations. Do you notice something missing from it? Yup, you're right, nothing connecting Las Vegas!

Too little spending?

Let us, for a moment, believe the Republican's revisionist history that FDR's New Deal was a failure and didn't work and it was WWII that got us out of the depression. Well then, looking at the graph below, an argument could be made that it failed because it didn't spend enough and it took the massive amounts of deficit spending for the war effort to really lift the economy.

Privatized Profits, Socialized Risk

Socialism! Marxism! Communism!

The loudest cry I've heard lately about this stimulus package is, "it's socialism!" Who are we kidding here? We practice and participate in socialism everyday, in what most would say are very necessary ways. Police and fire services are socialized, aren't they? Roads, bridges, water and sanitation systems, public schools are all socialized infrastructure and services. The cost of our armed services is also socialized. How come nobody seems to scream over these things, is it because we have no problem socializing the cost of things that provide a benefit to us all? The socialization of these things seems quite acceptable doesn't it? That's what taxation is all about.

What is not acceptable is the privatization of business profit while socializing the risks. Here is someone's comment from another blog I read that I think sums this up nicely.

Many businessmen claim that, the right to profit is theirs by virtue of what they've risked and, to some extent this is true, they're correct. The small businessman who mortgages his home in order to create a startup business SHOULD be rewarded for his effort. He works hard and should be able to profit. And, in a free market that doesn't subsidize his competition in the form of tax breaks to larger businesses that can afford campaign contributions (i.e. bribes) to the public officials who write them, that would be true.

Our problem isn't that we practice socialism. It's that we allow the socialization of risk while not requiring a directly proportional socialization of profits.

We've been doing this for the past 30 years with various forms of corporate welfare and currently the bank bailouts. For years, big business has wanted government out of the way, and for the past 8 years that's what they got, and look where their "laissez-faire" economics got us. Now, the same crowd who wanted free markets, deregulation and smaller government involvement are begging for welfare because they are "too big to fail".

I had to take a break!

I know it's been quite a while since I have posted anything here. I wanted to take a break and really absorb how the public at large and the people around me were reacting to the stimulus bill. Besides, there really wasn't much to talk about that wasn't already commented on. I mean the partisan bickering in the House and Senate, Obama's Holy Grail quest for bipartisanship, Republican's grand-standing obstructionism, and Democrat's weak-kneed resolve, none of these things are new developments.

With all that said, I am now fired-up and refreshed to begin the fight anew!

What's at stake

Is the President finally getting a backbone on this stimulus thing? Given his recent speech, I think he might be. The way I see it, he tried to play nice with the Republicans (see my earlier post) and what did they do? They all voted no, which is pretty much a big slap in the face! Well, today it seems he's finally putting them in their place...

In the last few days, we've seen proposals arise from some in Congress that you may not have read but you'd be very familiar with because you've been hearing them for the last 10 years, maybe longer. They're rooted in the idea that tax cuts alone can solve all our problems; that government doesn't have a role to play; that half-measures and tinkering are somehow enough; that we can afford to ignore our most fundamental economic challenges -- the crushing cost of health care, the inadequate state of so many of our schools, our dangerous dependence on foreign oil.

So let me be clear: Those ideas have been tested, and they have failed. They've taken us from surpluses to an annual deficit of over a trillion dollars, and they've brought our economy to a halt. And that's precisely what the election we just had was all about. The American people have rendered their judgment. And now is the time to move forward, not back. Now is the time for action.

So while our lawmakers are taking their sweet old time as our economy burns, let's take a look at a few meaningful things in this bill that are being held up with their pissing contest:

• $142 billion for a middle-class tax cut
• $47 billion to extend unemployment benefits
• $16 billion to expand food stamps
• $17 billion in one-time payments to low-income Americans
• $26 billion to expand access to health care
• $87 billion to help states pay for Medicaid
• $24 billion to modernized health information technology
• $46 billion to fix bridges and roads
• $80 billion to improve public education
• $19 billion for school construction
• $14 billion to make college more affordable
• $32 billion for clean energy

There's much more. All together, the Obama plan will create or save an estimated 3 to 4 million jobs and keep our nation"s economy from sliding into a lengthy and severe recession. So what is the real reason the GOP is so opposed to this stimulus package? I think the Huffington Post summed it up best...

The GOP does not want Obama or America to move forward, what else can they run on in 4 years?
Why didn't a single House Republican vote for the recovery package? One high-ranking congressional aide opined to the Huffington Post, "It wasn't because of family planning funds or preserving the National Mall or whatever Rush Limbaugh and Drudge's talking points were. It's because this legislation is the clearest repudiation of Bush and Congressional Republican economic policies yet."

It is, in a way, a public relations coup that the stimulus has been boiled down to, as one Hill Democrat puts it, "funding for the arts, funding for the mall, and funding to fight AIDS." Those aspects of the legislation, as the White House points out, constitute a mere 7/100th of one percent of the entire package.

What about jobs being created and long-term savings by the $6.7 billion for energy-efficient renovations and repairs to federal buildings...

"I don't think people realize what a big deal weatherizing the federal buildings would be. The government wastes millions of dollars every year on buildings that are old and need to be weatherized," said a high-ranking Democratic aide. "We have windows that leak and have bad insulation. These are buildings all over the country and we are going to go in there, weatherize them, create jobs and save money down the road."

The Republican ideology and the Bush years have left this country's economy in such a state of collapse that most economists say we have to think big. This is true on a broad level, where the middle-class saw its purchasing power drastically diminished during the past 8 years as their income remained stagnant while productivity and profits grew! The economic growth of the Bush years was funded by debt on the backs of the middle-class. So what if this bill props up dormant federal programs? The policies of the past eight years were hardly stimulative.

"We cannot move forward without understanding what created this crisis," said Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel. "This recovery package is the beginning of a longer-term investment in America's middle class, our small businesses, health care, renewable energy technologies and a new infrastructure to reinvigorate our economy so that American workers and businesses can compete and win in the 21st Century."

Should We Buy American?

What the hell is wrong with the "buy American" provisions in the proposed stimulus bill? The European Union's panties are all in a bunch because of this...

Under the “Buy American” clause passed by the US House of Representatives, American iron and steel must be used in construction projects that form part of the recovery plan. The US Senate wants to extend the scope of the clause before the Bill goes to the White House for approval.

To me, that is just common sense! If you are going to be using American taxpayer money to fund American construction projects, it only makes sense to use American iron and steel for those projects, doesn't it? I don't think there is a single person in this country that wouldn't be pissed if our tax money was being used to purchase imported steel for these projects.

This isn't the same as the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 which raised tariffs on imported goods to record levels forcing other nations to increase their tariffs on US goods causing imports and exports to drop in half further worsening the impact of the Great Depression. Nobody is calling for increased tariffs or anything like that, this is just a stipulation that taxpayer-funded projects use American goods. Actually, now that I think of it, I can't believe this stipulation isn't already a law or something!

Sadly, Obama is already pulling back and signaling he would remove the most provocative parts of the bill. I am an Obama supporter and voted for him, but this is a little disappointing.

Another Deduction!

Another Obama administration nominee with tax problems! Nancy Killefer has withdrawn her candidacy to be the first chief performance officer for the federal government due to a failure to pay employment taxes on household help for a year and a half.

The AP reported that on March 7, 2005, the D.C. Department of Employment Services slapped a tax lien on her home in the tony Wesley Heights neighborhood. The local government alleged that just three years after she left the high-powered Treasury post she began to fail to pay unemployment compensation tax for a household employee. And she failed to make the required quarterly payments for a year and half, whereupon a lien for $946.69 was placed on her home.

You know, if these officials, lawmakers and other fat cats actually paid their share of taxes like the rest of us, maybe our federal budget wouldn't be in such a crisis.

Deficit Spending

Here's a quick question—why do the Republicans all of a sudden have such a problem with deficit spending to help this county get out of its economic mess? The reason I ask this is because they didn't have any problem with deficit spending for the last 5 years to help a different country out of a mess, and that country was Iraq! They didn't have any problem with Bush's year after year deficit spending for his entire presidency! The national debt grew over 77% during Bush's presidency, more than under any previous president, including FDR who is their poster-child for spending! So if they didn't have a problem spending hundreds of billions of dollars on the reconstruction effort in Iraq, why do they have a problem doing the same for our own country?

Tax Exempt?

What is going on with these Democrats lately? Two of Obama's cabinet appointees seem to have trouble paying their taxes! First there was new Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner, who failed to pay Social Security taxes, even though he was paid extra to compensate for those taxes. Now we have Tom Daschle who has been picked to head the Health and Human Services Department. Apparently he failed to pay more than $120,000 in taxes! No wonder Democrats have no trouble raising taxes, they don't intend on paying them anyway! Look guys, if you want to get out of paying your taxes, do what the Republicans do, USE LOOPHOLES!

History Lesson

Given my recent posts about 'Trickle-Down' or 'Supply-Side' economics, I thought a little historical review was in order. According to the numbers, the conservative approach of "Take money away from 95% of the American public and invest in the few who need it the least" just doesn't work! The thing to keep in mind here is that during the Clinton years, taxes were actually raised and the Republicans screamed about how that would absolutely destroy the economy. The real numbers to look at here are the 'Median Household Income Growth' and the 'Employment Growth'. Bush's tax cuts that were supposed to be such a boon for the economy did manage to grow the GDP and investments, but didn't get the average american any further ahead, nor did they create any additional employment. The Reagan years, which they claim were so great, just don't compare to the growth of the late 90's.

Their crap just doesn't work! How many times do we have to try it before it sinks in?

UPDATE: It has been brought to my attention that my chart had an error. I had accidentally labeled the Reagan/Bush1 years as 1991-1993, it should have been 1981-1993. Sorry for the mistake.

A Time To Celebrate?

Polls show that a large majority of the american public wants this stimulus bill, thousands of people are losing their jobs everyday, people's retirement funds continue to dwindle, families are losing their homes, and the Republicans continue to be tone-deaf! Do they just not care about the average american? Nevermind, don't answer that. They're actually celebrating their united front against the stimulus bill according to several articles I've read today.

New York Times:

Republicans profess to be unconcerned. House Republicans on Thursday headed off to a retreat at The Homestead, a Virginia resort, still celebrating their unanimous stand — despite Mr. Obama’s visit to the Capitol to seek their support — against a package that in their view has too much big-government spending and too few tax cuts. Their unsuccessful substitute was entirely of tax cuts.

Washington Post:

The bill passed easily despite the opposition of all 177 Republican House members, but party leaders delighted in what they considered a victory after two straight electoral drubbings and much soul-searching about what the party stands for.

Now did I miss something? Didn't they just lose the presidency and a bunch of seats in the House and Senate? Wasn't a third of the stimulus bill comprised of tax cuts specifically to satisfy Republicans? Didn't President Obama ask Democrats to remove the controversial family planning aspect of the bill and several other items to once again appease the Republicans? Come on now, how much compromise do they expect? Their definition of bipartisan is to concede and give us everything we want!

Didn't we try it their way for the last 8 years, and look where that got us! They had no problem with Bush's $500 billion annual deficit spending for the last 8 years to benefit rich tax cuts! They had no problem spending hundreds of billions of dollars in Iraq without any budget oversight! Now all of a sudden they want to be fiscal conservatives! Their spending and 'supply-side' economics got us into this mess, their ideology of deregulation has led to a run-away train of greed and corruption that is still occurring with our bank bailout money! They have gotten us into the worse economic mess since the 1930's and now they don't want to spend any money to get us out of it, and they're proud to say so! I just can't even begin to understand the nerve these guys have.

The Republican party continues to be the obstructionist party, and as long as they keep going on that route, eventually they will be no party at all!

GOP, the "no" party!

House Minority Whip, Eric Cantor says in an editorial in Politico, that his party can't be the "no" party.

"At a moment when the country needs our help, it would be a great mistake for the House GOP to turn inward and simply become the party of “no.” We want our new president to succeed, and America needs our new President to succeed, which is why we will contribute the full force of our ideas to help him navigate the choppy waters. That’s why our leadership met with the president three times to offer him our ideas on the stimulus, including among other proposals a reduction in small business tax liability by 20 percent."

But when it came time to vote on the stimulus bill, that's exactly what they were, the "no" party. All 178 Republicans in the house voted against it! This is after they met with president Obama three times. He listened to their ideas and incorporated some of them into the bill -- including a large amount of tax cuts and even asked the Democrats to remove controversial items the Republicans had issue with.

They might not want to be the "no" party, but they certainly are the party of no new ideas! Their answer to everything is more tax cuts, tax cuts fix everything! If that were true, how come Bush's tax cuts didn't prevent this economic collapse? I already know what they'll say... "taxes weren't cut enough." I grow so tired of the old "Trickle-Down Economics" mantra everytime, look at wage growth during the Bush's years, stagnant, yet corporate profits were up, nothing is trickling down! If you give more tax cuts to corporations, you're just going to help them fund a new plant overseas or pay for that call center in India. It's not going to create many jobs here in the states.

Every leading economist who knows what their talking about says you have to spend money to get the economy going again. It's simple, spend money on infrastructure and other projects and services, which creates jobs, which gives people money to spend on goods and services, which will help businesses grow. It's not rocket science! If you just give everyone a tax cut, that money won't get spent, people will just save it. Everyone is too afraid to spend money right now, that's why the government has to do it.

So let's sum up, so far the GOP is the party of no ideas, no jobs, and most of all -- no clue!