Archive for the 'Politics' Category

Where’s The Outrage?

Published
by
Jon
on September 15, 2008
in News, Politics and Rant
. 0 Comments

Lehman Brothers Last night I was up much later than I should be watching the news about the financial crisis that has been unfolding. And to be honest it made it hard for me to go to sleep.

I do not work for a financial services company, nor do I have a significant investment portfolio as far as financial holdings go. But I could not stop running scenarios through my mind how my quality of life (and that of my daughter when she is older) is going to be worse off than previous generations.

To be blunt, we are in for a WORLD of hurt - possibly rivaling that of the Great Depression.

I found myself wondering, “Where’s the outrage?” I tuned into CNN today and they were covering OJ’s new trial live. Here we are in the midst of a very important presidential election, the economy is in shambles, we have no energy policy, we are in an open-ended war. And despite all that CNN figured it was in our best interests to follow OJ’s latest courtroom saga.

So where’s the outrage? Where are people DEMANDING change?

It’s to the point where it is just another short-lived news headline anytime a major institution fails. You know, like Enron or Arthur Andersen.

But this is not just another news item. It’s not every day a 150-year old institution fails. That is something that definitely does not happen every day.

So how bad is it? It is bad enough that the venerable Lehman Brothers filed for chapter 11.

Lehman Brothers is one of the oldest, perhaps one of the most respected securities firms out there. It was founded in 1850 and not only survived the Civil War, but they were instrumental in financing the reconstruction in the south, particularly Alabama.

Lehman also weathered the Great Depression, primarily by focusing on venture capital.

So let me repeat that - Lehman Brothers survived both the Civil War AND the Great Depression, but could not survive the Bush years.

Bear Stearns, Countrywide, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Merrill Lynch etc. The list goes on and on. Some of the largest financial institutions in the nation dead or close to. Or being bought for pennies on the dollar.

And all of this is a result of republican policy - or lack there of.

In republican circles, laissez-faire is the only way they know. Their ardent adherence to the ideology of Milton Friedman, that government regulation of any kind is evil, or better yet, corrupt.

From Wikiquote:

Corruption is government intrusion into market efficiencies in the form of regulations.

Now how does this tie into the current events?

Well, it just so happens that John McCain’s economic adviser, Phil Gramm, was the author of a bill in 2000 that deregulated what is known as credit default swap.

A credit default swap is a very complicated financial instrument that basically allows financial institutions to “insure” their debt using other institutions.

The undervaluation of credit risk and the lack of regulation caused speculation (and greed) to run rampant, and ultimately as institutions failed, it had a cascading effect through the financial system.

And this thing is far from done. We have AIG and Washington Mutual in precarious positions as well.

So this brings me back to the point again - WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE? These businesses are not simply folding. They are imploding, bringing the larger economy down with them. Republicans who always come out against “handouts” are first in line for the bailouts. Jobs are being lost. And yet there is no outrage.

There is that old saying, “If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?”

But what if we have a FOREST falling down and MILLIONS of people around to hear it, but no one is making any sounds?

Something is very wrong.

–Jon

Red States, Ignorance, And Why We Should Let Them Secede

Published
by
Jon
on September 9, 2008
in Politics and Rant
. 0 Comments

zomg spam It’s a Tuesday morning, the weather sucks, the economy sucks, the country is in a mess and I saw the latest poll numbers - according to Gallup McCain is crushing Obama’s support among independents now. Needless to say it has gotten my blood pressure up this morning. If you are expecting this to be a civil post, might as well stop reading as I am pissed today.

So yeah where to start. I simply do not get it. I am not sure how anyone can support someone who has supported Bush an average of 90% of the time since January 2001. My thought is that if you support Senator McCain at this point you fit in one of three categories:

One, you are ignorant and have poor judgment and should not be allowed to vote. You think everything is going ‘ok’ and buy into this bullshit war on terror as a crusade versus evil that is actually winnable (clue: it’s not you can’t beat ideology.)

Two, you are racist and refuse to support our nation’s first major-party African American candidate.

Or three, you are in that income bracket that makes a living by fucking everyone else over and want more of the same.

Now I am not going to go into a long spiel over why McCain is bad because if you support him you don’t care or don’t believe, and if you don’t support him you already know.

But this brings me to the next point - and I don’t really give a shit how controversial this may sound, but in layman’s terms fuck the south. There I said it. Fuck your ignorant, flat-earth, close-minded, racist, bigoted ways.

Your red-voting states are a drain on this country. For all your bitching about taxes, us so-called “immoral liberal” states SUPPORT YOU. If not for us, you would have to either pay more in taxes or do without infrastructure you depend on because fact is, your states do not have the GDP to support it!

According to The Tax Foundation report, 23 out of the top 25 states in federal dollars received versus paid are states that supported Bush in 2004. The same Bush that is leaving the next president with the largest deficit in history.

As counter-intuitive as it is with our fiscal situation the way it is, if McCain is elected I hope he cuts the shit out of taxes. Know why? Because it will hurt you FUCKING IDIOTS in the red states that supported him a lot more than those of us that did not. Here in NJ we get the raw deal - every year since 1981 we have ranked as either 49th or 50th (and 48th once in 1993) in federal tax dollars spent on our state, while we contribute more per capita than any other state. So yeah, tax cuts won’t hurt us - we already don’t benefit from it here. But Alaska (yeah Palin’s Alaska) will have to beg for more windfalls from their big oil friends. You know, the same windfalls that are an evil democratic idea. And Mississippi? Next time there is a hurricane don’t think you are getting jack shit either. The list goes on and on. You hate welfare? Then start your crusade against it by paying for your own fucking shit!

I am from a blue state, I am progressive, I support Barack Obama and all progressives for office, and I do NOT want to support you ignorant fucks in the so-called “red states” anymore. No way will my daughter inherit a piece of this national debt that YOUR presidents rung up.

Please, do us all a favor and secede. It will save me tax dollars and without your ignorance weighing down the electorate maybe we can get a good leader.

/rant off

–Jon

If I Were President… (Part 1)

Published
by
Jon
on June 9, 2008
in Politics
. 0 Comments

Seal of the President of the United States This is part one of a series I am writing on what I would do if I were elected President of the United States.

It is a hypothetical question you will often hear asked in social studies class, at debates, or at the dinner table - “What would you do if you were elected president?”

I know I have often pondered this myself. It is very easy to play armchair quarterback (or president in this case) and spout off the usual defend the nation, create jobs, protect the environment etc. The canned rhetoric we all have heard time and time again. But those aren’t really ideas of what you would or would not do but rather just spouting off what is expected of a president.

Seriously, find me someone running for the presidency campaigning on less jobs. Or someone campaigning on NOT defending the nation. Not going to happen.

Since I have developed a passion for politics (circa 2002 - thanks Howard Dean!) this has been one of those questions I have constantly thought about. If I were to ever run for President of the United States, what would my platform look like?

Well, first off I am progressive, but I believe in being fiscally conservative and efficient as well and not just pissing money into the wind. I believe that the purpose of the government is to provide for the well-being of it’s citizens, to serve as a facilitator of trade, to uphold the Constitution of the United States, and to centrally manage the infrastructure and policies that keeps everything functioning smoothly.

Having said that, here is part one, the first plank of my platform (I will follow up with other planks when I have time over the next couple of months):

Single-Payer Universal Health Care
Single-payer universal health care is not a liberal or conservative idea. It is a moral imperative. No one should ever have to make a choice between eating or buying prescription medicine. And no one should ever have to live a lower standard of life just because they were born at the wrong end of the income scale and can’t afford health insurance.

Health care is also an economic issue. More than half of all bankruptcies in the US are due to overwhelming medical costs.

The soaring costs of health care are having a detrimental impact on small businesses as well. About 52% of the US population works for what is considered a small business (less than 500 employees) and as the costs go up these businesses have to choose between less coverage or less employees. Neither option is appealing.

We are also losing jobs to other nations due to health care costs. For example, health care costs add about $1,500 dollars to every car General Motors produces. They now spend more money on health care than they do steel. As a result, GM is moving more production across the border to Canada where the national health care system makes their health care costs per vehicle negligible.

The biggest culprit in the soaring costs of health care is NOT the lawsuits as claimed by the GOP (malpractice lawsuits account for less than 2% of health care costs) but rather the OBSCENE profits. Between 2002 and 2005 health insurers averaged 66.75% profit margins. That means for every dollar we spend on health care, only 33 cents was being spent on actual care.

There are also the INSANE compensation packages that some of these executives receive. For example, UnitedHealth Group’s former CEO, William McGuire, received over $124 MILLION dollars in compensation for 2005. This is enough to cover the average annual premiums of for an entire town of 30,000 people! In the United States health care now accounts for over 15% of ALL spending. Compare this to other nations such as Canada where health care accounts for less than 10% of their GDP.

If I were elected President of the United States, I would do a complete overhaul of our health care system, starting with the divesture of the health care corporations. Some holdings will be liquidated to provide compensation to shareholders as the industry transitions to a nationalized, single-payer system. All executive agreements deemed excessive will be dissolved and those perks will be forfeit.

First phase would be the most difficult - converting a 2 trillion dollar a year for-profit industry to a nationalized system will take a substantial up-front investment. This would involve the United States government setting up a large (but temporary) transition team to set up the policies and infrastructure which would include implementing a new tax to fund the health care initiative - no cost for individuals making less than $25K per year, capped at a baseline of 3% of gross income for folks making under $250K a year, 5% (up to a maximum of $25,000 per year) for folks making more than $250K a year, and a 5% health care surcharge on corporations. These percentages are less than what most Americans are currently paying, with the exception of the $250K+ income group paying more but not in a way that would substantially impact the quality of life that their wealth affords them. These savings will be achieved by removing the profit and executive perks, as well as the marketing costs from the cost basis.

I understand there will be some investment losses due to the changeover of the industry and as a result we would have to allow investment write-offs to minimize the impact on the investment community.

The second phase of the transition will be implementing a compensation system for those that provide our care - the doctors, nurses, practitioners, surgeons, and all the support staff etc. This compensation system will provide strong pay base (vast majority of health care practitioners will see little to no change in compensation), and will feature merit-based rewards based on success rates in assisting patients with preventative lifestyle choices. For example, help X number of patients reduce their risk of developing type 2 diabetes, earn X dollars more. The merit system will reward making people healthier, as opposed to having to treat them more often.

Third phase will be re-working the pharmaceutical industry model by putting caps on profit margins, executive compensation, and implementing price controls. A program will be put in place for rewarding research into new areas of medicine that best effect our quality of life. Stipends will be paid to pharma research firms based on efficacy of treatments as opposed to patent-driven monopolies and market penetration. Pharmaceutical companies will still be competitive, for-profit entities, but under much tighter regulation and scrutiny.

Fourth and final phase will involve preventive health care. Encouraging people to become more physically active and eat more nutritionally sound meals can have a direct impact on how much medical treatment will be necessary to provide, and as a result this effects our costs. A healthier public will be more cost-efficient to treat than an unhealthy public rampant with heart disease and type 2 diabetes. This can be achieved by starting good habits with the young - reward programs for kids that take good care of themselves including possible bonds to be used for college, etc.

In closing, this post is obviously my opinion, but I think there is some merit to most of what I have mentioned here. The fact that health care costs are soaring, while the overall health of the nation is not says to me we are not getting a lot of bang for our buck.

While I understand and appreciate that we are a free-market system, health care is one area where I feel the free-market system is counter-productive to our desired end result. The fact is the sicker we are and the more we need them, the less likely the insurers are to provide us with the care we need (and have paid for.)

Next part I will be focusing on energy policy.

–Jon

Declaring Our Independence: Endorsing Barack Obama

Published
by
Jon
on April 7, 2008
in Politics
. 0 Comments

Barack Obama It is 2008, and we find our nation once again fighting for it’s independence - this time not from the tyranny of a king, but from the powerful, elite, special interests who have driven us to war, pillaged our treasury, and sold out our economy for their own personal gain.

Having said that, I formally endorse and pledge my full support to Barack Obama as my choice to lead our nation back onto the path of greatness.

The introduction of the United States Declaration of Independence seems fitting about now. Emphasis mine:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

The phrase I emphasized, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, is fitting in this current situation. We need NEW leadership. NEW ideas. A NEW approach.

Electing another Clinton won’t do that. For all of Hillary’s experience, she is still part of that same “old Washington” way of thinking. Do we really want to have 28 years of Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton?

I gave this primary a lot of thought. And many times I was leaning towards different candidates.

At one point, I was holding out for Al Gore. But that was not meant to be, and after further consideration he seems to be more influential as an outsider right now.

John Edwards was also another candidate I strongly considered. I liked his message about class, about poverty and the economic divides. Unfortunately he was unable to get the momentum going and his fundraising was anemic at best.

Hillary Clinton was a tough one because my opinion of her is so conflicted. Thinking of her does bring back memories of the days when the economy was much more robust and we were at peace. Things were good when Bill Clinton as president. But that was not Hillary’s doing. Nor can Bill claim total credit. And the manner in which she has run her campaign the past few months has been a total turn-off.

Then we have Barack Obama. I had never heard of him until he gave his speech against the Iraq war in 2002. It was a bold thing to do, being that at the time the majority of the public having been mislead by Bush’s lies was supportive of going to war. He also gave a passionate speech at the 2004 democratic convention. But to me he was just that senator from Illinois that I did not know much about.

Over the course of the last six months I have watched and listened and watched and listened some more. I watched almost every debate. And I come away with an opinion of Barack Obama that not only is he articulate and extremely intelligent, but I believe he might be one of the last few honest, sincere politicians out there. Watching him speak about the issues that effect us all, I get the distinct impression that he REALLY does care about us all.

But being a president is not all about speeches and ideas. It is about managing and delegating authority over the largest economy in the world along with the most advanced military in the world.

So I decided to spend some time focusing on Barack’s skills and I became even more sold. Two areas that I think make him strongest and most electable: his fundraising and his judgement.

1. Fundraising
It is an unfortunate fact, but to be an effective candidate and win elections you have to raise and spend money. Lot’s of it. Barack’s ability to raise money is almost unbelievable. He has managed to break every fundraising record there is, set new records, and go on to break his own records. In fact, the the single-month record haul of $55 million in February was five times that that presumptive republican nominee John McCain raised.

What makes these totals even more impressive is the fact that Obama does NOT accept money from PAC’s or lobbyists and instead relies on individual contributors. He is trying to keep the bad money out of the system as best he can.

For the month of March Obama’s average campaign donation was just $96 dollars, but he had over 442,000 donors for the month.

You do not get 442,000 people in one month to open up their wallets and give you money during a recession unless you are really connecting with them and they believe in you.

2. Judgment
Another characteristic of Barack Obama is his keen judgment. He has a strong grasp of the issues and is often ahead of everyone else in this regard.

First you have his strong opposition to the Iraq war. This speech was thoughtful, moving, and most of all prescient. This passage is of particular note:

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda

Everything he said there is true and came to be.

Then there was Barack Obama’s foresight of the current mortgage crisis. Not only did he see it coming, he sent a letter to Federal Reserve Chairman Bernake and Treasury Secretary Paulson urging them to hold a summit to try and preempt this crisis.

If we had a responsive government with leadership like Barack Obama is capable of providing, perhaps the 1% of American households that lost their homes since this crisis began might have been able to save their homes.

Judgment is not about always being right, but about seeing the facts and making sound decisions based on those facts. And Barack Obama has proven time and time again he is a person of sound judgment and character.

The 2008 democratic primary race is one for the ages. Never in my life have I seen such a tight, hard-fought primary contest before and I might never see one again. Had this been any other year Hillary Clinton would have had this locked up ages ago. Most would not have guessed that Barack Obama, a relative newcomer on the national scene, would be such a powerful and charismatic opponent for Hillary Clinton.

For all the drama of this primary season, in the end it will make for a better nominee. The organizations built on the ground will be invaluable for the general election, and honestly if Barack Obama can sustain the full-on barrage he has taken from the Clintons, arguably one of the most powerful political machines out there, and come out of it ahead like he has I think he is more than ready to take on John McCain.

I am ready to put my faith into something new and I believe we can change the course of our history with this election, and Barack Obama has my full support.

–Jon

A Response to the State of the Union

Published
by
Jon
on January 29, 2008
in Politics and Rant
. 0 Comments

George W BushSo last night I listened to the State of the Union address (cannot bring myself to watch that idiot speak with all his smirking) and I found it to be just like the all the previous ones - full of the usual grandiose statements and lies. At least there was nothing as huge as BIG lie - the 16 words in the 2003 State of the Union that led us into the Iraq war.

In the work ahead, we must be guided by the philosophy that made our nation great. As Americans, we believe in the power of individuals to determine their destiny and shape the course of history. We believe that the most reliable guide for our country is the collective wisdom of ordinary citizens.

This is a statement that on face value is true.

But what the president did not mention is that he does not follow the collective wisdom of ordinary citizens. In fact when the majority of Americans support an issue, he is likely to veto it on his own ideological grounds.

When almost 60% of Americans said they wanted out of Iraq and congress responded by passing a bill with timelines for withdraw, the president vetoed it.

When almost 90% of Americans polled say they wanted congress to reauthorize the State Children’s Health Insurance Plan (SCHIP) and 72% of Americans supported expanding the program to cover more children, congress passed bi-partisan legislation only to have the president veto it.

If there is anything that President Bush has proven it is that he does not really care what the American people think.

American families have to balance their budgets; so should their government.

This statement made me laugh the hardest. Coming from someone who rung up more debt than previous 42 presidents combined, I would hardly trust him to manage anything related to money whatsoever.

Please, go back to Texas and do your own thing. Oh wait, you were not good at that either.

The people’s trust in their government is undermined by congressional earmarks, special interest projects that are often snuck in at the last minute, without discussion or debate. committee reports that never even come to a vote.

Yeah excessive earmarks are bad. For example, your fellow republican Alaskan senator Ted Stevens’ now infamous “Bridge to Nowhere” that would have spent $230 million on a bridge serving just 50 people. Luckily congress had enough sense to get that shit out of there.

But I hardly think that these earmarks undermine the people’s trust in their government as much as you launching costly, prolonged wars over false intelligence. Or your poor leadership and even poorer response to Hurricane Katrina. Or your complete politization of the Department of Justice. Removing honest, non-partisan employees of our nation’s law enforcement in order to replace them with partisan hacks that put ideology and political gain above the rule of law.

The list can go on and on, but you Mr. Bush have done far more to undermine government credibility than any government earmark or entitlement program ever could.

Our security, our prosperity and our environment all require reducing our dependence on oil.

Let’s start by increasing the CAFE fuel standards from 27.5 miles per gallon, to the standards like that of China which are 38 miles per gallon. I know you oppose this. Not sure why, maybe it has something to do with who your friends are?

This is yet another example of you making a blanket statement that sounds good in sound bites, but then proceed to either not back it up, or take actions that are the opposed to the statement.

To keep America competitive into the future, we must trust in the skill of our scientists and engineers and empower them to pursue the breakthroughs of tomorrow.

Yes sir, you trust our scientists so much that when they say something you don’t like, you censor and edit their findings so that it suits your ideological needs.

Congress must pass liability protection for companies believed to have assisted in the efforts to defend America.

Ahh yes, the infamous “telecom immunity” - the very fact that the president wants retroactive immunity for telecom companies that broke the law and helped the Bush administration illegally spy on American citizens is quite amusing. I am not even sure what else to say. I guess I will leave it to senator Ted Kennedy who said it best:

The President has said that American lives will be sacrificed if Congress does not change FISA. But he has also said that he will veto any FISA bill that does not grant retro-active immunity. No immunity, no FISA bill. So if we take the President at his word, he’s willing to let Americans die to protect the phone companies.

Then there is this gem in the State of the Union:

Our military families also sacrifice for America. They endure sleepless nights and the daily struggle of providing for children while a loved one is serving far from home.

We have a responsibility to provide for them. So I ask you to join me in expanding their access to child care, creating new hiring preferences for military spouses across the federal government, and allowing our troops to transfer their unused education benefits to their spouses or children.

Our military families serve our nation. They inspire our nation, and tonight our nation honors them.

No one will argue with any of that.

Except yet again the president is full of shit.

He threatened to veto the Webb amendment which would have required that troops get time off equal to time they are deployed in the combat theater between deployments. So for example, if you serve 12 months in Iraq you would get 12 months of rest before being deployed on your next tour.

Fortunately for Bush his obedient lap dog republicans in congress voted against it and saved his veto pen some ink.

And when he vetoed pay raises for the troops while so many military families struggling to make ends meet, he must be showing his way of honoring the troops.

If that is how he treats people he honors, I hope he never honors me.

Full transcript of the State of the Union address is available at CNN.

Thankfully this is the last one we will EVER have to endure from this president.

Capitulation: It’s What’s For Dinner! (Updated)

Published
by
Jon
on December 17, 2007
in Politics and Rant
. 0 Comments

Democratic PartyIt is now near the end of 2007 the first year the democratic party has controlled both houses of congress since 1993 and a good time to evaluate the past year.

I am not sure how to say this in a more kind and less offensive way so I am just going to come out and say it - we are pretty fucked right about now. It seems the more important the issue is to the electorate, the more likely the democratically-controlled congress is going to capitulate to the Bush administration and with it their constituency of neocons, crooks, and zealots.

The sad thing is that we are not in this predicament because of the failures of the republican party (which there is so many one could write volumes) but the failure of the democratic leadership in passing any substantial legislation for the people of the United States at all.

The democratic party was elected to the majority of both chambers of congress in 2006 because of one main factor: Iraq. Iraq has become the 800-pound gorilla in the room and is arguably one of the biggest blemishes on this nation’s history and standing, and the public saw the democratic party as the only way to end this debacle and reign in Bush.

According to this poll (warning: PDF) back in January, 45% of the people polled wanted the new congress to focus on Iraq compared to the second most common answer, the economy, at only 7%.

And then you have this other poll (warning: PDF) from back in March that found that 59% of ALL Americans wanted legislation calling for a troop pullout from Iraq by August 2008. 59%! That is not some small group of extremists or some fringe group, but the majority of the American public.

So what is the newly-elected democratic leadership to do? A wise person would choose to give the public what they expected and get us the fuck out of Iraq. Well, to their credit they did give it one good shot only to have Mr. 24% approval rating veto it.

But since this high-point in their tenure, it has been all downhill with the majority party acting more like a timid schoolboy afraid to get some bumps or scrapes on the playground than the party that was elected to change the direction of the country.

Should the democrats be surprised when under their leadership that congress has a record-low 11% approval rating when they constantly let people down?

Just last month Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Democrats won’t approve more money for the Iraq war this year unless President Bush agrees to begin bringing troops home. And what does our democratically-controlled congress say today? Here’s another $70 billion George! Yes, that’s right. They capitulated yet AGAIN to not only give the worst president in US history more funding for the most expensive and worst foreign policy disaster in United States history, but they also are going to do so without any conditions.

Capitulation goes beyond Iraq too. Today there was MASSIVE capitulation on an update to the FISA bill, this time giving telecom companies that illegally cooperated with the Bush administration’s domestic spy program (with some assistance coming BEFORE 9/11) retroactive immunity. This is basically a “Get Out Of Jail Free” card for all these multi-billion dollar telecoms who willingly and knowingly were breaking the law.

Where is the oversight? Where is the accountability? Where is the action? Where is the outrage?

If this blatant disregard for the electorate’s wishes had happened 100 years ago there would be a revolution. But in today’s society of iPods, reality TV, MySpace, it seems that apathy is running at an all-time high.

So I guess the question is what do we do now? I have no fucking clue, but moving seems like such a good option at times.

–Jon

UPDATE: Looks like Senator Dodd’s threat of a filibuster against fellow democrats on the FISA bill worked and forced Harry Reid to table the bill until January. Kudos to Senator Dodd for standing up for what’s right.

Also here is a snippet of a zinger from Senator Ted Kennedy which basically sums up why this bill with retroactive immunity for the telecoms is BS:

The President has said that American lives will be sacrificed if Congress does not change FISA. But he has also said that he will veto any FISA bill that does not grant retro-active immunity. No immunity, no FISA bill. So if we take the President at his word, he’s willing to let Americans die to protect the phone companies.

What The Hell Is Wrong With These People?

Published
by
Jon
on November 20, 2007
in News, Politics and Rant
. 0 Comments

Last night on CNN I saw this beauty of a report and now I found it on the web. After watching the report, and reading it on the web I am at a loss for words.

So apparently if you are a woman who is gang-raped in Saudi Arabia, you are guilty because, well, you are a woman?

Here is a nice tidbit about our “friends” treatment of women:

Under Saudi law, women are subject to numerous restrictions, including a strict dress code, a prohibition against driving and a requirement that they get a man’s permission to travel or have surgery. Women are also not allowed to testify in court unless it is about a private matter that was not observed by a man, and they are not allowed to vote.

Also note that 15 of the 19 hijackers that attacked us on 9/11 were from Saudi Arabia as well.

Saudi Arabia’s wealthiest STILL continue to fund terrorist organizations that are against us, and other Western nations.

Despite all of this, Bush himself has said that they are our “friends” and considers them a strong ally while we funnel them BILLIONS of dollars a year for oil and aid. Meanwhile they take our money and invest in some of the biggest American corporations. Citigroup’s (Citibank - the third largest bank corporation in the US) largest individual shareholder is Saudi Prince al-Waleed bin Talal. He also owns substantial stakes in HP, Kodak, Ebay, and Amazon.com. So the more oil we buy from our “friend” the more our nation’s largest multinational corporations are owned by these people who represent a culture that is diametrically opposed to our way of life.

This is just mind-boggling to me - that we can ally and be “friends” with this nation of islamic fundamentalists whose very ideology goes against the values that the United States was founded upon - a country that is constantly ranked as among the worst violators of human rights in the world by Amnesty International.

Meanwhile here in the Western hemisphere we still have a boycott of Cuba for being communist….

Maybe it is time for a top-down review of all of our policies, foreign and domestic. I strongly believe that ALL of our policies should be able to be reconciled with the values of the country as a whole, not the benefit of the top 1% of the wealthiest people in the world.

–Jon

“Give me Liberty, or give me Death!”

Published
by
Jon
on November 16, 2007
in Politics
. 0 Comments

The title of this post is a quote that is often attributed to Patrick Henry in 1775. Despite the fact that there is some controversy over the accuracy of this quote, the meaning behind it rang very true with the founding fathers. They felt that freedom and liberty were more than words, but ideas that were so important that they were worth fighting for. And often dying for. That the founding fathers would choose to die rather than to give up any freedoms says something.

There is also this quote that is often attributed to Benjamin Franklin though as with the quote above it is possibly mis-attributed:

“Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

Again, this illustrates the thinking of the era - that freedom and liberty were the ideas and values and were paramount to everything else, including security.

This idea is even enshrined in the preamble of the United States Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

In 230-plus some odd years we have done a 180 and now the attitude seems to be “give up your freedoms and liberty and we will make you safe from terrorists” which ironically plays right into the terrorists’ hands. The goal of terrorism is not to kill - that is a means to achieve the desired end result - which is to strike fear into an opponent to get what you want.

In fact, here is the definition of terrorism from the dictionary:

ter·ror·ism — the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.

Since 9/11 we have seen assorted legislation and actions in the name of security and almost every bit of it sacrificing the very freedoms our forefathers died to give us including the suspension of Habeas Corpus via the Military Commissions Act.

While watching the Democratic debate on CNN last night they touched on this concept that you have to choose human rights or security and cannot have both. They did not get into it too much, but I thought Barack Obama nailed it when he said that “The concepts are not contradictory.” which is pretty much how I feel about it. They are not mutually exclusive concepts.

I personally believe that we as a nation have lost our moral compass and we need to get it back. There was a time where other countries looked up to us because we practiced what we preached. Now we imprison people indefinitely without right to legal counsel in the name of security.

“But but but, we are only imprisoning the terrorists!” is what you will always hear. Yeah, the majority of the people in Guantanamo are suspected terrorist douche bags, but not every person that is detained is necessarily a terrorist. Mistakes are made and sometimes the wrong people are detained. And by denying these people legal representation, and in some cases torturing them we are acting in a manner that is inconsistent with the values that this nation was built upon.

By allowing this meme to permeate the American lexicon, it has had a cascading effect on the world. Countries that once feared us mock us. Some countries like Iran feel emboldened. Most of our friends now keep us at arm’s length and do not trust us.

Another often overlooked side effect of our behavior is the old golden rule - “…do to others what you would have them do to you…” - now when American troops are captured in battle they are even more likely to be mistreated because we have set the bar lower.

So the question is, in another 200 years what type of nation will the United States of America be? If there was a way for our forefathers to come back to life, would they be proud or full of shame?

I honestly can’t tell you. I have no idea where this is going. But I can tell you this - we are on the WRONG track and if we don’t get on the right track soon, the American dream may well perish.

–Jon