They may be unlikeable, but there's no denying Tea Party clout in the Republican Party. Let's hope that the light of day finally exposes the Tea Party for the hoax that it is before any more political damage is done.
Last week, the New York Times revealed the results of a poll conducted by Harvard Professor Robert Putnam and Notre Dame political scientist David Campbell. In the Putnam/Campbell poll, Tea Party followers were found to be less popular than atheists and Muslims. I realize that the results of the poll represents a slight to atheists and Muslims, which is totally unjustified, but the fact that the Tea Party image is held in such poor esteem definitely says something about that movement's core philosophy. Manure might be more useful.
Democracies thrive when cooperation rules the day, and the Tea Party's obstructionist ways add nothing positive toward solving our nation's woes. Let's hope their polling numbers continue to fall.
Saturday, August 20, 2011
Friday, August 19, 2011
IGNORING THE OBVIOUS IN TEXAS
It's hotter than ever in Texas, with its record breaking streak of days with 100+ degree temperatures as proof, but Texas governor/presidential candidate Rick Perry says that global warming is a bunch of hooey and his adoring fans keep nodding. Texas is also suffering from one of the longest droughts ever recorded in the region, but Texas governor/presidential candidate Rick Perry says that climate change is just a bunch of hooey, and all his adoring fans keep nodding at that one too. The same goes for melting polar ice caps and the large increase of tornadoes in America. According to Perry, it's all a fluke!
I understand the notion that everything's bigger in Texas, which includes the tales of Texas politicians, but what I can't understand is why Texans suffering under the relentless heat tout Perry as some kind of hero and think all he says is gospel truth. Perhaps the heat has fried their brains and mass dehydration has set in. I hear that both cause hallucinations, which might account for some of the hero worship, but, come on. Perry's education hasn't included a single science class on the environment, so it's not like the guy has any legitimate scientific credentials – unless taking in tens of thousands of dollars of fossil fuel industry donations counts for anything.
Climatologists warn that melting sea ice will raise the height of our oceans by three feet over the next twenty years, but few in the political arena seem to want to confront exactly what that will mean for the tens of millions of folks who live within a few miles of shorelines. Much of that area will be inundated with water, and if folks think that barriers will keep the rising oceans at bay, they are seriously underestimating the power of Mother Nature. Perry's pandering will not hold back high tide, let alone a storm surge, nor will sticking heads in the sand keep folks dry.
Global warming is already here, whether the good folks in Texas want to acknowledge it or not. The proof is right outside their front door.
I understand the notion that everything's bigger in Texas, which includes the tales of Texas politicians, but what I can't understand is why Texans suffering under the relentless heat tout Perry as some kind of hero and think all he says is gospel truth. Perhaps the heat has fried their brains and mass dehydration has set in. I hear that both cause hallucinations, which might account for some of the hero worship, but, come on. Perry's education hasn't included a single science class on the environment, so it's not like the guy has any legitimate scientific credentials – unless taking in tens of thousands of dollars of fossil fuel industry donations counts for anything.
Climatologists warn that melting sea ice will raise the height of our oceans by three feet over the next twenty years, but few in the political arena seem to want to confront exactly what that will mean for the tens of millions of folks who live within a few miles of shorelines. Much of that area will be inundated with water, and if folks think that barriers will keep the rising oceans at bay, they are seriously underestimating the power of Mother Nature. Perry's pandering will not hold back high tide, let alone a storm surge, nor will sticking heads in the sand keep folks dry.
Global warming is already here, whether the good folks in Texas want to acknowledge it or not. The proof is right outside their front door.
SCAMMING YOUR WAY INTO A FIRST CLASS SEAT
The headline on a Comcast Internet article I saw this morning read, "Trick Your Way On To First Class". An airliner was pictured in the background with a note that indicated the article contained tips on how airline passengers could finagle their way into a first class seat. Flying somewhere is not in my foreseeable future, so I didn't read the article, but the headline made me think about a topic I've been mulling over for some time – our society's affinity for get-rich-quick schemes.
At a time when our nation is experiencing severe economic distress, lotteries have grown more popular by the day. Games with the highest payouts attract the most players despite the fact that the odds of any given individual winning are infinitesimal at best. Casinos and gaming parlors are spreading like wildfires with promises of new found wealth and riches. Almost daily, our newspapers reveal that another Ponzi scheme has been uncovered. What do they all have in common? The promise of riches for next to nothing in return!
Whatever happened to making money the old-fashioned way – by working for it?
I remember the first time I stepped into a jet airplane and started walking down the aisle toward my seat in the rear of the plane. I glanced at the "suits" sitting in the first class section and wondered what kind of work each of those passengers did to earn the kind of money necessary to afford a first-class seat. It didn't occur to me to scam my way into first class or think such a seat would fall into my lap. No, I wondered how much work it would take to earn my way there.
It's not like that anymore. It seems like a lot of people are more interested in the scam than the work, which is regrettable, because society suffers when a day's worth of labor is ignored and devalued. The truth is a nation of workers can become wealthy quicker than a nation of scammers, but it takes effort and appreciation of labor to do so. Those things have been in short supply lately, and unfortunately, our nation has produced little fruit because of it.
At a time when our nation is experiencing severe economic distress, lotteries have grown more popular by the day. Games with the highest payouts attract the most players despite the fact that the odds of any given individual winning are infinitesimal at best. Casinos and gaming parlors are spreading like wildfires with promises of new found wealth and riches. Almost daily, our newspapers reveal that another Ponzi scheme has been uncovered. What do they all have in common? The promise of riches for next to nothing in return!
Whatever happened to making money the old-fashioned way – by working for it?
I remember the first time I stepped into a jet airplane and started walking down the aisle toward my seat in the rear of the plane. I glanced at the "suits" sitting in the first class section and wondered what kind of work each of those passengers did to earn the kind of money necessary to afford a first-class seat. It didn't occur to me to scam my way into first class or think such a seat would fall into my lap. No, I wondered how much work it would take to earn my way there.
It's not like that anymore. It seems like a lot of people are more interested in the scam than the work, which is regrettable, because society suffers when a day's worth of labor is ignored and devalued. The truth is a nation of workers can become wealthy quicker than a nation of scammers, but it takes effort and appreciation of labor to do so. Those things have been in short supply lately, and unfortunately, our nation has produced little fruit because of it.
Thursday, August 18, 2011
DRAFTING SUSAN IN 2012
I've tried to convince my wife, Susan to run for the Republican presidential nomination. I know she's not particularly interested in spending the next fifteen months traipsing around the country on the campaign trail, and I'm positive she's not keen on the idea of moving from our humble abode into the White House, but after watching all the hoopla surrounding Michele Bachman's so-called victory in the Iowa straw poll last week, I know Susan would be a contender! Here's why:
Bachman laid claim to a resounding victory in Iowa's Republican presidential candidate straw poll after collecting only 4,823 votes from across the entire state of Iowa. That's one vote for every 2,073 hogs Iowa produced last year, but who's counting? In 2009, when my wife ran for judge here in York County, she garnered 3,869 votes in the Republican primary. Granted, that number is approximately a thousand less votes than Bachman registered in Iowa, but Susan's votes were just from this county (Pennsylvania has 56 counties) and Bachman's votes were from an entire state.
Put in another perspective, while Bachman took first place with 4,823 state-wide votes and Ron Paul took second place with 4,671 statewide votes, the third-place finished (Tim Pawlenty) drew only 2,293 votes, which means that Susan would have been the third place finisher with 3,869 votes – ahead of Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney, Huntsman, Cain and Rick Perry…not a bad showing since she never campaigned in Iowa.
I know what you're thinking. You're thinking that Susan couldn't have duplicated that show in Iowa. Au contraire!
Like Bachman, Susan was born in Iowa – Clinton, to be exact. Like Bachman, Susan grew up in the Iowa. Unlike Bachman, Susan attended high school (Clinton High) and college in Iowa (Cornell College in Mount Vernon) and visits relatives in the state on a frequent basis, not just when an election rolls around. Susan's late mother, Doctor Margaret Smythe Emmons, was a well-known philanthropist in the state who supported many local and state organizations and educational institutions. I realize one shouldn't rest on the laurels of their parents, but Susan's generosity and sense of obligation to her community doesn't fall far from her mother's tree. People in Iowa appreciate that kind of thing.
Susan has a proven record of public service accomplishments that far outshines anything that Bachman has achieved in her brief congressional career. That matters to Iowa voters too. Plus, on any given Saturday in the fall, Susan wears a Hawkeye sweatshirt. You won't be seeing Bachman wearing one (She's a Golden Gopher fan)!
So, to any Bachman fans out there who might accidentally come upon this liberal blog, you can thank your lucky stars that Susan is married to a guy with more skeletons in his closet than a Wal-Mart superstore could hold. Otherwise, you wouldn't have such silly grins on your faces and Bachman would be looking up in the polls at a much more qualified candidate.
Maybe it's a good thing that Susan has no interest in running for the Republican nomination. As her liberal Democratic husband, I have a vested interest in keeping peace in this household.
Bachman laid claim to a resounding victory in Iowa's Republican presidential candidate straw poll after collecting only 4,823 votes from across the entire state of Iowa. That's one vote for every 2,073 hogs Iowa produced last year, but who's counting? In 2009, when my wife ran for judge here in York County, she garnered 3,869 votes in the Republican primary. Granted, that number is approximately a thousand less votes than Bachman registered in Iowa, but Susan's votes were just from this county (Pennsylvania has 56 counties) and Bachman's votes were from an entire state.
Put in another perspective, while Bachman took first place with 4,823 state-wide votes and Ron Paul took second place with 4,671 statewide votes, the third-place finished (Tim Pawlenty) drew only 2,293 votes, which means that Susan would have been the third place finisher with 3,869 votes – ahead of Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney, Huntsman, Cain and Rick Perry…not a bad showing since she never campaigned in Iowa.
I know what you're thinking. You're thinking that Susan couldn't have duplicated that show in Iowa. Au contraire!
Like Bachman, Susan was born in Iowa – Clinton, to be exact. Like Bachman, Susan grew up in the Iowa. Unlike Bachman, Susan attended high school (Clinton High) and college in Iowa (Cornell College in Mount Vernon) and visits relatives in the state on a frequent basis, not just when an election rolls around. Susan's late mother, Doctor Margaret Smythe Emmons, was a well-known philanthropist in the state who supported many local and state organizations and educational institutions. I realize one shouldn't rest on the laurels of their parents, but Susan's generosity and sense of obligation to her community doesn't fall far from her mother's tree. People in Iowa appreciate that kind of thing.
Susan has a proven record of public service accomplishments that far outshines anything that Bachman has achieved in her brief congressional career. That matters to Iowa voters too. Plus, on any given Saturday in the fall, Susan wears a Hawkeye sweatshirt. You won't be seeing Bachman wearing one (She's a Golden Gopher fan)!
So, to any Bachman fans out there who might accidentally come upon this liberal blog, you can thank your lucky stars that Susan is married to a guy with more skeletons in his closet than a Wal-Mart superstore could hold. Otherwise, you wouldn't have such silly grins on your faces and Bachman would be looking up in the polls at a much more qualified candidate.
Maybe it's a good thing that Susan has no interest in running for the Republican nomination. As her liberal Democratic husband, I have a vested interest in keeping peace in this household.
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
RANGER RICK MOUTHS OFF
The Republican's newest presidential candidate, Rick Perry of Texas told a radio talk-show audience the other day that Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke was guilty of committing treason for carrying out the Federal Reserve plan known as "quantitative easing". The plan entailed the Federal Reserve printing extra dollars and using those funds to purchase municipal bonds on behalf of the federal government. The plan's intent was to add more liquidity to our nation's money supply and promote investment and job growth by making more cash available for businesses to borrow. How much success the plan garnered is a debatable question, but doing nothing – as Hoover did, which caused the Great Depression – was not an option and the Federal Reserve was trying to achieve a public good.
Unfortunately, for Tea Party folk like Perry who hate the Federal Reserve and see it as a front-man for "big government", anything the Federal Reserve does to stabilize financial markets and promote job growth is treasonous. Ordinarily, I'd pass Perry's comment off as just another wing-nut rant, but Perry is the guy who, earlier this year, said that Texas should secede from the Union. Perry calling Bernanke a traitor sounds a lot like hypocrisy to me. Then again, Perry is no stranger to hypocrisy.
And then there's Perry second comment about Bernanke. Perry said that if Bernanke came down to Texas, they'd treat him ugly. You know, that's what the Taliban in Southern Afghanistan say about American troops, and we all know what the Taliban mean. That's what white Southerners said about Black people, and we all know what the Southerners meant. That's what Perry meant too.
A politician threatening American citizens with death over political differences does not belong on American soil, so it's time for guys like Rick Perry to be soundly rejected by everyone. Dictators and brutal regimes do that kind of stuff. Americans should never tolerate it, no matter what party the politician represents.
Unfortunately, for Tea Party folk like Perry who hate the Federal Reserve and see it as a front-man for "big government", anything the Federal Reserve does to stabilize financial markets and promote job growth is treasonous. Ordinarily, I'd pass Perry's comment off as just another wing-nut rant, but Perry is the guy who, earlier this year, said that Texas should secede from the Union. Perry calling Bernanke a traitor sounds a lot like hypocrisy to me. Then again, Perry is no stranger to hypocrisy.
And then there's Perry second comment about Bernanke. Perry said that if Bernanke came down to Texas, they'd treat him ugly. You know, that's what the Taliban in Southern Afghanistan say about American troops, and we all know what the Taliban mean. That's what white Southerners said about Black people, and we all know what the Southerners meant. That's what Perry meant too.
A politician threatening American citizens with death over political differences does not belong on American soil, so it's time for guys like Rick Perry to be soundly rejected by everyone. Dictators and brutal regimes do that kind of stuff. Americans should never tolerate it, no matter what party the politician represents.
FALK ON THE WAR IN AFGHANISTAN
Richard Falk, the Albert G. Milbank Professor Emeritus of International Law at Princeton University recently wrote a powerful essay for Aljazeera entitled, Why the Afghanistan War Wont End Soon. Falk's piece details America's collective lack of understanding regarding the dynamics of Afghanistan and our failure to recognize that military intervention is not the answer for achieving a lasting piece in that region and other places around the globe. It's a very thought-provoking piece and I'd urge everyone to read it. The article can be found at the following web address:
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/08/201181592644232878.html
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/08/201181592644232878.html
ASSAD'S KILLING MACHINE CONTINUES
Syrian President Bashar Assad apparently didn't get the Koran memo about not killing his own people during the Muslim holy month of Ramadam. He's ordered his military to lay siege to the Syrian city of Latakia where his regime's opponents have seized control of the local government and inspired other anti-Assad protests around Syria. For a guy like Assad, that's not the kind of protest a brutal dictator can tolerate. After all, look what happened to Mubarak in Egypt. Mubarak allowed Egyptian protests to take hold and he ended up in jail facing trial and calls for his death. Assad read the tea leaves. He's opted to use violence to quash the rebellion and the Syrian military is only too happy to comply.
Syrian navy vessels have bombarded the city of Latakia from coastal waters with rockets and scores of Syrian tanks have attacked the city from the east with a constant stream of mortar fire. Innocent civilians, whose only crime is their desire for freedom from tyranny and oppression, are caught in the middle of an unmerciful assault intended to level their city.
We've seen this story countless times before, in places like Iran and Libya and Bosnia, where brutal totalitarian regimes resort to senseless violence to hold onto power, and are willing to sacrifice any number of innocent civilians in the course of doing so.
I wish political would come to appreciate that killing is not the answer. Dare I dream?
Syrian navy vessels have bombarded the city of Latakia from coastal waters with rockets and scores of Syrian tanks have attacked the city from the east with a constant stream of mortar fire. Innocent civilians, whose only crime is their desire for freedom from tyranny and oppression, are caught in the middle of an unmerciful assault intended to level their city.
We've seen this story countless times before, in places like Iran and Libya and Bosnia, where brutal totalitarian regimes resort to senseless violence to hold onto power, and are willing to sacrifice any number of innocent civilians in the course of doing so.
I wish political would come to appreciate that killing is not the answer. Dare I dream?
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
GOOD NEWS FROM THE WORLD OF SMALL FINANCE
Every now and again, I like to sit down and examine my "investment portfolio" and pretend I'm a hedge fund manager surveying a vast financial empire from my corner office on the seventeenth floor of a Wall Street office building. In reality, my office is a converted bedroom on the second floor of my home. My window looks out over our two-car garage and the view is mostly of my neighbors' house across the street. The portfolio I mentioned doesn't really qualify as a vast financial empire, but that's okay too. It's still a treasure in my book.
You see, my portfolio is a KIVA portfolio, a roster of micro-lending loans I've made to individuals around the world. KIVA [found at www.KIVA.org] is a micro-lending organization that matches individuals and groups of lenders with individuals and groups of borrowers in third world and developing countries who seeking to provide a more fruitful life for their families. Many KIVA borrowers live in regions where obtaining traditional financial backing to improve their lives is impossible, even though the sums of money requested are quite small by Western standards. That's why KIVA has stepped in and filled the void. You can too! Visit the KIVA website and join the crowd of micro-lenders.
I'm amazed at the fact that not a single one of the borrowers I helped fund has ever defaulted. The big-wigs on Wall Street can't match that record, nor can they really appreciate having made the difference in an ordinary person's life the way KIVA lenders can.
As I survey my own portfolio, I can see that Ramadan's zoo in Palestine is up and running again and turning a profit. Rahmeh in Jordan purchased more goats for her family dairy and cheese sales have expanded. The clothing inventory Eleazar from Mexico bought for her clothing shop has been selling well and 90% of her loan has been repaid. Karabek from Tajikistan just harvested the crops from the hector of new land he purchased and now he can pay for his children to get schooling this coming fall. The coffee bean plants that Edward from Costa Rica purchased are now in the ground and the additional livestock that Kadyrzhan from Kyrgyzstan bought are living happily in his barn. I could go on, but you get the picture.
You can lend as little as $25 through KIVA and make a difference in the lives of people you might never meet. Check out the KIVA website. www.kiva.org
You see, my portfolio is a KIVA portfolio, a roster of micro-lending loans I've made to individuals around the world. KIVA [found at www.KIVA.org] is a micro-lending organization that matches individuals and groups of lenders with individuals and groups of borrowers in third world and developing countries who seeking to provide a more fruitful life for their families. Many KIVA borrowers live in regions where obtaining traditional financial backing to improve their lives is impossible, even though the sums of money requested are quite small by Western standards. That's why KIVA has stepped in and filled the void. You can too! Visit the KIVA website and join the crowd of micro-lenders.
I'm amazed at the fact that not a single one of the borrowers I helped fund has ever defaulted. The big-wigs on Wall Street can't match that record, nor can they really appreciate having made the difference in an ordinary person's life the way KIVA lenders can.
As I survey my own portfolio, I can see that Ramadan's zoo in Palestine is up and running again and turning a profit. Rahmeh in Jordan purchased more goats for her family dairy and cheese sales have expanded. The clothing inventory Eleazar from Mexico bought for her clothing shop has been selling well and 90% of her loan has been repaid. Karabek from Tajikistan just harvested the crops from the hector of new land he purchased and now he can pay for his children to get schooling this coming fall. The coffee bean plants that Edward from Costa Rica purchased are now in the ground and the additional livestock that Kadyrzhan from Kyrgyzstan bought are living happily in his barn. I could go on, but you get the picture.
You can lend as little as $25 through KIVA and make a difference in the lives of people you might never meet. Check out the KIVA website. www.kiva.org
AND THEN THERE WERE EIGHT
America's political version of a World Wrestling Federation free-for-all, the G.O.P's field of 2012 presidential candidates, just booted its first contestant from the ring, former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty. Apparently, coming in third out of a group of eight candidates who campaigned in Iowa (Perry only joined the crowd on the day of the Iowa straw poll) wasn't a good enough showing for Pawlenty to continue fighting, so he bowed out of the ring the next day and packed his bags for Minnesota. Cheer up, governor, the good citizens of Iowa might have done you a favor – they saved your soul!
I don't agree with a majority of the positions Pawlenty takes on political issues, but he's the only genuine individual in that field of presidential pretenders, including Perry, who truly understands the plight of common ordinary Americans. The other Republicans are great with the rhetoric, and Perry or Romney might even beat Obama in the voting booth, but none of the remaining G.O.P. candidates are in the same league with Pawlenty when it comes to authenticity.
Political pundits will assign blame for the failure of Pawlenty's campaign on any number of items, but something tells me that Tim's authenticity is what proved to be his undoing. He's not the angry, frothing at the mouth warrior that Tea Party followers and evangelical extremists are looking for in a presidential candidate. He's just a very intelligent, level-headed, respectful kind of man who'd have to sell his soul to garner the Republican nomination. It's a good thing for him that it never came to that.
I don't agree with a majority of the positions Pawlenty takes on political issues, but he's the only genuine individual in that field of presidential pretenders, including Perry, who truly understands the plight of common ordinary Americans. The other Republicans are great with the rhetoric, and Perry or Romney might even beat Obama in the voting booth, but none of the remaining G.O.P. candidates are in the same league with Pawlenty when it comes to authenticity.
Political pundits will assign blame for the failure of Pawlenty's campaign on any number of items, but something tells me that Tim's authenticity is what proved to be his undoing. He's not the angry, frothing at the mouth warrior that Tea Party followers and evangelical extremists are looking for in a presidential candidate. He's just a very intelligent, level-headed, respectful kind of man who'd have to sell his soul to garner the Republican nomination. It's a good thing for him that it never came to that.
Monday, August 15, 2011
WHY I'M NOT A TEA PARTY MEMBER
Last Sunday, Doctor Pandelidis, posed a rhetorical question in his [8/7 York Sunday News] column: Why aren't you a Tea Party member? I'd like to respond to the good Doctor's question in terms he will understand. I am not a Tea Party member because I am not a narcissist, I am not delusional and I am not afraid to check my reality and take responsibility for my actions. Plus, I believe in compromise and the notion that every person's voice and opinion has merit.
Pandelidis pointed out that our $14 trillion national debt now equals our national GDP (gross domestic product), that forty percent of this year's federal spending is borrowed money, and that the 2011 federal budget deficit equals 11 percent of our GDP. He's right. Those are the facts. He also asserts that those figures are the result of "destructive government policy." That's his opinion, and one that I also happen to share.
Where Pandelidis and I part company is over the question of which government policies are destructive and which policies promote the general health and welfare of our entire population. Doctor Pandelidis thinks that having social programs is the destructive policy. I think the destructive policy is not paying for them when we as a nation have the ability to do so.
Pandelidis suggests that Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment compensation, food stamps and guaranteeing health care and medicine for every citizen are destructive government policies that run afoul of our traditional American economic principles, among which he lists individual freedom and the responsibility to take care of one's self. He calls those economic principles healthy and holds them up as an American ideal. I call them self-centered and narcissistic – and want no part of the notion that I am not my brother's keeper. That's a Tea Party's belief. It's not mine.
The God I worship is not the God of American capitalism, it's the God who instructed us to love and look out for our neighbors.
I'm not delusional either. I don't pretend that cutting government waste will magically make the deficit disappear. I don't pretend that you can fight two wars without paying for them. I don't pretend that the wealthiest one percent in this nation, that controls forty percent of our nation's wealth, are overburdened by taxes and cannot afford to pay more toward reducing the national debt. I don't pretend that our corporate CEO's, many of whom pay less in taxes than their secretaries, deserve the tax loopholes they enjoy. I don't pretend that corporations who earn billions in profits should pay no taxes. I don't pretend that by laying-off tens of thousands of government workers from their jobs, our nation's unemployment epidemic will suddenly be cured, and I don't pretend that sacrifice on the part of all Americans is not a necessity. Those are Tea Party beliefs, not mine.
I'm also not afraid to check my reality and take responsibility for my actions. I owe a great debt to this country. Government grants and guaranteed student loans helped me secure an undergraduate degree and a law degree. When I could not work and had no insurance to cover the medical services I required, the government helped fund that too. Now that I'm productive again, it's my obligation to help shoulder the load for others who find themselves similarly in need.
Doctor Pandelidis, on the other hand, shows great disdain for the very entity that helped educate and continues to feed him. You see, the good Doctor received his medical degree at the Penn State University College of Medicine in Hershey, a state-owned institution that invested more taxpayer dollars in Doctor Pendelidis' medical degree than he paid himself. Oh yes, he paid tuition, but the actual cost of that degree far exceeded the tuition he paid. We taxpayers picked up that tab. Plus, many of the insurance providers that Doctor Pandelidis accepts in his practice are government-funded, so he's eating from the same government trough he routinely vilifies. That's the Tea Party way. It's not mine.
Finally, I believe in the need for compromise in order for a republic such as ours to flourish. I believe that the concerns of every political party are entitled to be considered and reflected in all actions taken by our government. I do not subscribe to the "it's my way or the highway" approach to democratic government. That's the Tea Party way. It's not mine.
Pandelidis pointed out that our $14 trillion national debt now equals our national GDP (gross domestic product), that forty percent of this year's federal spending is borrowed money, and that the 2011 federal budget deficit equals 11 percent of our GDP. He's right. Those are the facts. He also asserts that those figures are the result of "destructive government policy." That's his opinion, and one that I also happen to share.
Where Pandelidis and I part company is over the question of which government policies are destructive and which policies promote the general health and welfare of our entire population. Doctor Pandelidis thinks that having social programs is the destructive policy. I think the destructive policy is not paying for them when we as a nation have the ability to do so.
Pandelidis suggests that Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment compensation, food stamps and guaranteeing health care and medicine for every citizen are destructive government policies that run afoul of our traditional American economic principles, among which he lists individual freedom and the responsibility to take care of one's self. He calls those economic principles healthy and holds them up as an American ideal. I call them self-centered and narcissistic – and want no part of the notion that I am not my brother's keeper. That's a Tea Party's belief. It's not mine.
The God I worship is not the God of American capitalism, it's the God who instructed us to love and look out for our neighbors.
I'm not delusional either. I don't pretend that cutting government waste will magically make the deficit disappear. I don't pretend that you can fight two wars without paying for them. I don't pretend that the wealthiest one percent in this nation, that controls forty percent of our nation's wealth, are overburdened by taxes and cannot afford to pay more toward reducing the national debt. I don't pretend that our corporate CEO's, many of whom pay less in taxes than their secretaries, deserve the tax loopholes they enjoy. I don't pretend that corporations who earn billions in profits should pay no taxes. I don't pretend that by laying-off tens of thousands of government workers from their jobs, our nation's unemployment epidemic will suddenly be cured, and I don't pretend that sacrifice on the part of all Americans is not a necessity. Those are Tea Party beliefs, not mine.
I'm also not afraid to check my reality and take responsibility for my actions. I owe a great debt to this country. Government grants and guaranteed student loans helped me secure an undergraduate degree and a law degree. When I could not work and had no insurance to cover the medical services I required, the government helped fund that too. Now that I'm productive again, it's my obligation to help shoulder the load for others who find themselves similarly in need.
Doctor Pandelidis, on the other hand, shows great disdain for the very entity that helped educate and continues to feed him. You see, the good Doctor received his medical degree at the Penn State University College of Medicine in Hershey, a state-owned institution that invested more taxpayer dollars in Doctor Pendelidis' medical degree than he paid himself. Oh yes, he paid tuition, but the actual cost of that degree far exceeded the tuition he paid. We taxpayers picked up that tab. Plus, many of the insurance providers that Doctor Pandelidis accepts in his practice are government-funded, so he's eating from the same government trough he routinely vilifies. That's the Tea Party way. It's not mine.
Finally, I believe in the need for compromise in order for a republic such as ours to flourish. I believe that the concerns of every political party are entitled to be considered and reflected in all actions taken by our government. I do not subscribe to the "it's my way or the highway" approach to democratic government. That's the Tea Party way. It's not mine.
Sunday, August 14, 2011
FOR SALE : Crystal Cathedral
The bankruptcy sale of Reverend Robert Schuller's Crystal Cathedral has all the drama of a genuine holy war, but the entire mess boils down to who's going to get the "Almighty Dollar" – actually, dollar should be pluralized. Schuller's mega-church is $50 million in debt and the church's creditors are tired of waiting for their payments. Earlier this year the creditors forced the Crystal Cathedral into bankruptcy after the ministry defaulted on its debts. Ministry assets, including the Crystal Cathedral are currently being liquidated in a court-ordered sale to satisfy the ministry's obligations, but the church's ministry is still fighting to prevent the sale.
Here's where the Catholic Church entered the fray. The Roman Catholic Diocese of Orange County wants to build a Cathedral. By their own estimates, building such a Cathedral would cost the Diocese well over $100 million dollars. On the other hand, buying the Crystal Cathedral at a liquidation sale would save the Diocese over $50 million, and they wouldn't have to deal with all the hassles of a construction project. So, the Catholics have submitted a $53.6 million bid.
Not so fast, you papists! Officials at Chapman University, a university with ties to the Disciples of Christ – a Protestant denomination, want the Crystal Cathedral too. They've only bid $50 million for the building, but they're sweetening the deal by agreeing to lease the building back to the Crystal Cathedral ministries. I'm sure the Pope is crying foul.
David Green, an evangelical CEO reportedly filed a bid of over $50 million too.
Finally, the Cathedral Ministry has put out its own call for a miracle…asking listeners to show that God is on their side by forking over donations so the ministry can pay off its debts and avoid the sale.
It's hard to figure out which party will get God's endorsement, but there's one thing for sure – the endorsement is going to cost over fifty million dollars. I hope God's good for it!
Here's where the Catholic Church entered the fray. The Roman Catholic Diocese of Orange County wants to build a Cathedral. By their own estimates, building such a Cathedral would cost the Diocese well over $100 million dollars. On the other hand, buying the Crystal Cathedral at a liquidation sale would save the Diocese over $50 million, and they wouldn't have to deal with all the hassles of a construction project. So, the Catholics have submitted a $53.6 million bid.
Not so fast, you papists! Officials at Chapman University, a university with ties to the Disciples of Christ – a Protestant denomination, want the Crystal Cathedral too. They've only bid $50 million for the building, but they're sweetening the deal by agreeing to lease the building back to the Crystal Cathedral ministries. I'm sure the Pope is crying foul.
David Green, an evangelical CEO reportedly filed a bid of over $50 million too.
Finally, the Cathedral Ministry has put out its own call for a miracle…asking listeners to show that God is on their side by forking over donations so the ministry can pay off its debts and avoid the sale.
It's hard to figure out which party will get God's endorsement, but there's one thing for sure – the endorsement is going to cost over fifty million dollars. I hope God's good for it!
Saturday, August 13, 2011
QUASHING SPEECH IN THE CITY BY THE BAY
The lyrics to the old Tony Bennett tune, "I left My Heart in San Francisco" will have to changed, now that San Francisco's Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) authority has started playing foot-loose and fancy-free with our Nation's constitutional free speech rights. This past Thursday, BART officials shut down cell phone communication services at the downtown rail stations to prevent people from coordinating a protest rally. The planned rally was intended to protest against the actions of BART police officers who shot a man on a station platform on July 3rd of this year.
I appreciate that BART officials are tasked with the job of facilitating travel by citizens from point A to point B, but that's no justification for engaging in Gestapo-type free-speech suppression that typically happens in third world countries and dictatorial regimes. And just because England recently stooped to such low-level behavior doesn't mean BART officials have to follow suit. I thought America was supposed to be above all that; apparently, I was wrong!
When our government agencies start interfering with the right of citizens to communicate with one another, and to peacefully assemble, our long-cherished First Amendment right to freedom of speech is placed in serious jeopardy.
Tony Bennett may have left something in San Francisco, but it wasn't his cell phone!
I appreciate that BART officials are tasked with the job of facilitating travel by citizens from point A to point B, but that's no justification for engaging in Gestapo-type free-speech suppression that typically happens in third world countries and dictatorial regimes. And just because England recently stooped to such low-level behavior doesn't mean BART officials have to follow suit. I thought America was supposed to be above all that; apparently, I was wrong!
When our government agencies start interfering with the right of citizens to communicate with one another, and to peacefully assemble, our long-cherished First Amendment right to freedom of speech is placed in serious jeopardy.
Tony Bennett may have left something in San Francisco, but it wasn't his cell phone!
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
RIOTOUS LONDON MOBS - A SPARK THAT BECAME A WILDFIRE
In London, and in other cities in England, crowds of angry, restless youth have taken to the streets during recent nights to riot, loot and create social unrest and disorder. They've burned down homes and businesses, demolished automobiles and looted shops of all merchandise. Whole neighborhoods lie in ruin.
As British officials seek to quell the disturbances, many are painting the rioters as a band of outlaws in need of swift and unmerciful justice, but that type attitude does nothing to solve the discontent of England's youth that underlies that which sparked the riots in the first place.
Let's not forget that mobs have a mind of their own. People in mobs frequently do things they'd never consider doing on their own. Mobs provide a kind of release from the constraints that normally keep people on the path of acceptable social behavior and a mob's occupants often get swept up in the tide. I'm not suggesting that mob behavior is necessarily justifiable. I'm just acknowledging the reality of the situation.
In many respects, a riotous mob is like a wildfire. With a wildfire, a single spark can touch off a blaze that quickly erupts into an unstoppable inferno. The wildfire spreads, engulfing and destroying tens of thousands of acres in its path. Riotous mobs frequently carry the same kind of destructive force. After a wildfire has been brought under control, efforts are undertaken to determine the spark that touched off the blaze, but lost in the shuffle and often suppressed is the question of why the wildfire spread. The same goes for rioting mobs.
In England, they know what sparked the riots. The police in Tottenham killed a black man and a crowd gathered at the Tottenham police station demanding an explanation to what happened. The police were not forthright in their explanation and the crowd's anger reached a boil. Okay, that was the spark, but what has kept the fires burning? That's the question people everywhere should be discussing, because I believe the answers to that question are not answers that are unique to England. They apply everywhere social unrest boils over into riotous mobs.
On the whole, youth in England suffer from extremely high poverty and unemployment rates. Large segments of their generation feel that hope for the future is gone because of severe cutting of government funding for education and other social programs. The resulting anxiety has lead to restlessness and anger – dry tinder waiting for a spark. It doesn't justify the rioters' behavior, but it does help explain why their behavior has spread. Societies that ignore those answers do so at their own peril.
As British officials seek to quell the disturbances, many are painting the rioters as a band of outlaws in need of swift and unmerciful justice, but that type attitude does nothing to solve the discontent of England's youth that underlies that which sparked the riots in the first place.
Let's not forget that mobs have a mind of their own. People in mobs frequently do things they'd never consider doing on their own. Mobs provide a kind of release from the constraints that normally keep people on the path of acceptable social behavior and a mob's occupants often get swept up in the tide. I'm not suggesting that mob behavior is necessarily justifiable. I'm just acknowledging the reality of the situation.
In many respects, a riotous mob is like a wildfire. With a wildfire, a single spark can touch off a blaze that quickly erupts into an unstoppable inferno. The wildfire spreads, engulfing and destroying tens of thousands of acres in its path. Riotous mobs frequently carry the same kind of destructive force. After a wildfire has been brought under control, efforts are undertaken to determine the spark that touched off the blaze, but lost in the shuffle and often suppressed is the question of why the wildfire spread. The same goes for rioting mobs.
In England, they know what sparked the riots. The police in Tottenham killed a black man and a crowd gathered at the Tottenham police station demanding an explanation to what happened. The police were not forthright in their explanation and the crowd's anger reached a boil. Okay, that was the spark, but what has kept the fires burning? That's the question people everywhere should be discussing, because I believe the answers to that question are not answers that are unique to England. They apply everywhere social unrest boils over into riotous mobs.
On the whole, youth in England suffer from extremely high poverty and unemployment rates. Large segments of their generation feel that hope for the future is gone because of severe cutting of government funding for education and other social programs. The resulting anxiety has lead to restlessness and anger – dry tinder waiting for a spark. It doesn't justify the rioters' behavior, but it does help explain why their behavior has spread. Societies that ignore those answers do so at their own peril.
RAPIST WARREN JEFFS SENTENCED TO LIFE IN PRISON
Yesterday, a jury in Texas sentenced rapist Warren Jeffs to a sentence of life in prison. Jeffs raped 12 and 14-year old girls and demonstrated no remorse for his monstrous actions. In fact, he claimed that he was entitled to do so as the leader of a Utah-based Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
Warren Jeffs is not a spiritual man. He's a cult leader. He's a scumbag. He's a rapist, and now he's a prisoner with a life sentence too. Good riddance!
Warren Jeffs is not a spiritual man. He's a cult leader. He's a scumbag. He's a rapist, and now he's a prisoner with a life sentence too. Good riddance!
Sunday, August 7, 2011
VOTERS SHOULD TAKE A LOOK IN THE MIRROR
Congress has sunk to a new low. According to a CNN poll released last week, eighty-four percent of the population disapproves of the job Congress is doing. With those abysmal numbers floating around, you'd think our Congressional delegation would be worried about their prospects of being re-elected during the next campaign cycle, but that's not necessarily true because they know those numbers don't mean squat. What matters is a politician's approval rating in his or her own district.
Disapproving of the way Congress is handling matters is as old as this Republic, but returning our same representatives to Congress year after year is a tradition of almost equal age. That means that while the majority of the public disapproves of the job other Congressmen are doing, they're happy with the job performance of their own representatives. The only conclusion that can be drawn from those facts is that our Congressmen are not responsible for their abysmal job performance – we are. If we elect representatives who pledge to adhere to strict ideological stances and refuse to engage in negotiations or compromise with representatives of folks with opposing viewpoints, we are, in essence, voting for failure. That's our fault, not Congress.
Disapproving of the way Congress is handling matters is as old as this Republic, but returning our same representatives to Congress year after year is a tradition of almost equal age. That means that while the majority of the public disapproves of the job other Congressmen are doing, they're happy with the job performance of their own representatives. The only conclusion that can be drawn from those facts is that our Congressmen are not responsible for their abysmal job performance – we are. If we elect representatives who pledge to adhere to strict ideological stances and refuse to engage in negotiations or compromise with representatives of folks with opposing viewpoints, we are, in essence, voting for failure. That's our fault, not Congress.
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
THE MASTERS OF SHILLING
The ink on the debt ceiling law hasn't even dried and the 2012 Republican presidential candidates are already shilling in unison that the law is bad and that raising the debt ceiling spells disaster for America. I use the word "shilling" [slang term for the act of posing as an innocent bystander at a confidence game but giving aid and assistance to the perpetrators of the scheme as a decoy] because it aptly describes the candidates' collective hoodwinking of American citizens.
The confidence game in question is the Republican policy of fiscal irresponsibility, a flashy carnival game called smaller government that's anything but small and nowhere near as fair as the average layman thinks the game should be. Then again, carnival games never are. The trick to a financially successful carnival game is to offer the contestants the illusion of fairness while rigging the game to maintain an advantage for the house. Republicans have that down to a tee.
In early 2001, President Bush inherited a budget from President Clinton that was producing an income surplus over government expenditures. During Clinton's final years in office, those surpluses were being applied to paying down the national debt. Instead of continuing on the Clinton's path of financial responsibility, Bush and his Congressional backers (which included a majority of the current batch of G.O.P. presidential candidates) switched course and sold Americans on the notion that the budget surplus belonged to hard-working taxpayers and the government should give the money back. Republicans were silent about the national debt, but let's be honest here. It wasn't in their interest to be fiscally responsible when there was more political headway to be gained by giving taxpayers a handout.
Then, September 11th happened…and the G.O.P. war machine kicked into high gear…and American soldiers marched off to wars in Iraq and Afghanistan…and anyone who dared to ask, "Who's going to pay for these wars?" was labeled a traitor, unpatriotic, un-American and drowned out by the drum-beats of war. Instead of asking Americans to pay higher taxes to support the war efforts (as was done in every previous war in American history), the G.O.P. urged Americans to borrow more, spend more and demand lower taxes to support the public's endless wave of consumption. Like carnival barkers, G.O.P. politicians told Americans they could have it all, and a gullible public fell for the scam.
For seven full years, the Republican carnival game called smaller government financed our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan by placing all war-related expenditures on our nation's credit card – the national debt. Not a single dime was appropriated out of the normal government budget for the war effort, nor was any attempt made to ask Americans to sacrifice for the war.
Meanwhile, business for American banks, investment houses and insurance companies was booming, thanks in large part to the Republican-led dismantling of banking and securities regulations that were previously instituted to prevent a melt-down of our nation's financial sector. Profits were everywhere. Fortunes were made. The public was happy – until the house of cards began to fall, as will happen with any Ponzi scheme. Suddenly, our country's largest banks, investment house and insurance conglomerates began to fail, and the effect of those failures was so strong, that it threatened to bring about the collapse of our entire banking system and plunge America into another Great Depression.
To prevent another calamitous depression, Congressional Democrats and a reluctant President Bush passed a massive financial package (publicly called "the bailout") just weeks before the completion of the Bush Administration. The "bailout" saved what was left of the common man's retirement account and investment savings, but you'd never realize that fact if you listened to what Republicans were saying. They were doing what they do best – shilling!
What the average American hated about the "bailout" was not that critical financial institutions were saved. People were angry because leaders of those saved institutions, whose shady practices and greed caused the failure of their institution, use government funds to give themselves millions of dollars in bonuses and pay raises, instead of using the money to stabilize their institutions. In essence, the public was hurting while the greedy got rich on the public's dime.
I bring up the subject of Republican shilling because, while Republicans were decrying the government bailout of the financial sector in order to win the approval of angry voters, and fanning the flames of what has become known as Tea Party politics, Republicans were also giving aid and assistance to the perpetrators of the financial sector's scheme. Republican politicians were acting as a decoy – the very definition of shilling. You see, while Congressional Republicans were loud-mouthing the bailout package, they were also opposing all provisions in the bailout package that were designed to prevent government funds from being used for bonuses and raises. Those same G.O.P. politicians were also collecting millions in campaign donations from political action committees controlled by leaders of the financial sector.
For Republican politicians, our nation's financial calamity proved to be a win-win situation. They were able to attract huge numbers of voters by publicly declaring opposition to the bailout package while, behind the scenes, they were able to protect financial sector leaders who contributed millions to G.O.P. campaign coffers. The irony of the situation is that millions of taxpayer dollars were funneled into Republican campaign war chests, and Democrats got the blame. Republicans have truly mastered the art of shilling.
Our recent debt ceiling debate provides another good example. Republicans added trillions to the national debt by not paying for the wars they initiated, but painted Democrats as the party responsible for our burgeoning national debt. Republicans lured the public with the profession of a desire for smaller government, but in actuality, and away from the public's eye, advocated for the public's decreased wealth.
Unfortunately, the public is still mesmerized by the glitzy lights of the G.O.P.'s carnival game and cannot see that the game's been rigged. Good shilling will do that.
The confidence game in question is the Republican policy of fiscal irresponsibility, a flashy carnival game called smaller government that's anything but small and nowhere near as fair as the average layman thinks the game should be. Then again, carnival games never are. The trick to a financially successful carnival game is to offer the contestants the illusion of fairness while rigging the game to maintain an advantage for the house. Republicans have that down to a tee.
In early 2001, President Bush inherited a budget from President Clinton that was producing an income surplus over government expenditures. During Clinton's final years in office, those surpluses were being applied to paying down the national debt. Instead of continuing on the Clinton's path of financial responsibility, Bush and his Congressional backers (which included a majority of the current batch of G.O.P. presidential candidates) switched course and sold Americans on the notion that the budget surplus belonged to hard-working taxpayers and the government should give the money back. Republicans were silent about the national debt, but let's be honest here. It wasn't in their interest to be fiscally responsible when there was more political headway to be gained by giving taxpayers a handout.
Then, September 11th happened…and the G.O.P. war machine kicked into high gear…and American soldiers marched off to wars in Iraq and Afghanistan…and anyone who dared to ask, "Who's going to pay for these wars?" was labeled a traitor, unpatriotic, un-American and drowned out by the drum-beats of war. Instead of asking Americans to pay higher taxes to support the war efforts (as was done in every previous war in American history), the G.O.P. urged Americans to borrow more, spend more and demand lower taxes to support the public's endless wave of consumption. Like carnival barkers, G.O.P. politicians told Americans they could have it all, and a gullible public fell for the scam.
For seven full years, the Republican carnival game called smaller government financed our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan by placing all war-related expenditures on our nation's credit card – the national debt. Not a single dime was appropriated out of the normal government budget for the war effort, nor was any attempt made to ask Americans to sacrifice for the war.
Meanwhile, business for American banks, investment houses and insurance companies was booming, thanks in large part to the Republican-led dismantling of banking and securities regulations that were previously instituted to prevent a melt-down of our nation's financial sector. Profits were everywhere. Fortunes were made. The public was happy – until the house of cards began to fall, as will happen with any Ponzi scheme. Suddenly, our country's largest banks, investment house and insurance conglomerates began to fail, and the effect of those failures was so strong, that it threatened to bring about the collapse of our entire banking system and plunge America into another Great Depression.
To prevent another calamitous depression, Congressional Democrats and a reluctant President Bush passed a massive financial package (publicly called "the bailout") just weeks before the completion of the Bush Administration. The "bailout" saved what was left of the common man's retirement account and investment savings, but you'd never realize that fact if you listened to what Republicans were saying. They were doing what they do best – shilling!
What the average American hated about the "bailout" was not that critical financial institutions were saved. People were angry because leaders of those saved institutions, whose shady practices and greed caused the failure of their institution, use government funds to give themselves millions of dollars in bonuses and pay raises, instead of using the money to stabilize their institutions. In essence, the public was hurting while the greedy got rich on the public's dime.
I bring up the subject of Republican shilling because, while Republicans were decrying the government bailout of the financial sector in order to win the approval of angry voters, and fanning the flames of what has become known as Tea Party politics, Republicans were also giving aid and assistance to the perpetrators of the financial sector's scheme. Republican politicians were acting as a decoy – the very definition of shilling. You see, while Congressional Republicans were loud-mouthing the bailout package, they were also opposing all provisions in the bailout package that were designed to prevent government funds from being used for bonuses and raises. Those same G.O.P. politicians were also collecting millions in campaign donations from political action committees controlled by leaders of the financial sector.
For Republican politicians, our nation's financial calamity proved to be a win-win situation. They were able to attract huge numbers of voters by publicly declaring opposition to the bailout package while, behind the scenes, they were able to protect financial sector leaders who contributed millions to G.O.P. campaign coffers. The irony of the situation is that millions of taxpayer dollars were funneled into Republican campaign war chests, and Democrats got the blame. Republicans have truly mastered the art of shilling.
Our recent debt ceiling debate provides another good example. Republicans added trillions to the national debt by not paying for the wars they initiated, but painted Democrats as the party responsible for our burgeoning national debt. Republicans lured the public with the profession of a desire for smaller government, but in actuality, and away from the public's eye, advocated for the public's decreased wealth.
Unfortunately, the public is still mesmerized by the glitzy lights of the G.O.P.'s carnival game and cannot see that the game's been rigged. Good shilling will do that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)