Rooting For The GOP In The Mid-Terms

Yes, you read that headline correctly: I hope the Republicans win the mid-term elections this November and take over the House Of Representatives. And putting them in charge of the Senate, although not as likely, wouldn’t be a bad thing either.

No, I am not smoking crack. No, I haven’t flipped parties–I am still a Liberal. And no, this isn’t a joke.

It’s time for the GOP to get to work and show the American public exactly what they will do to improve the economy, stimulate job growth, protect our borders, and make this country whole again. It’s time for the likes of John Boehner and Mitch McConnell to stop whining and crying about how their party of “No” has been unable to get their ideas across the aisle. It’s time for the Republicans and the Tea Party to stop threatening to filibuster every vote on a Democratic bill, and delay every Obama appointment. It’s time to put them in the driver’s seat to see exactly what their “ideas” are. It’s time for them to do their damn jobs.

I don’t agree with anything they have to say, and I am surely not going to vote for them myself, but the GOP seems to believe that they can fix this country better than the Democrats can. Boehner and McConnell continue to assert that the American public doesn’t like how the Democrats are handling the economy, and they claim we don’t like the tactics the Democrats used to get healthcare reform and financial reform passed. So let’s see what they can do when they have the power to do it.

Here’s why this is a good strategy for the Democrats:

The Veto: As long as President Obama is in the White House, he still commands veto power. This is the Liberal safety brake that allows me to sleep at night. No crazy trickle-down economics bill will get passed Obama’s desk, and no bills will become law that infringe on my civil rights or raise my middle-class taxes. Healthcare reform will not get repealed. And no new wars will be started while Barry-O is sitting in the Oval office. However, I absolutely trust that if a good idea comes from the right wing that actually makes it to his desk, he will sign it into law. I trust the President to do what is right because that’s always been his M.O., and that’s why I voted for him. So as long as he is the check against anything radical or ridiculous, I say to the GOP: bring it on (I just had to get a W quote in here).

Congressional Procedures: Let’s see how the GOP likes to be filibustered to death. Let’s see them use the cloture they cried about during the healthcare votes. Let’s watch the Republican party squirm when the Democrats use every trick in the congressional playbook to muck-up their right-wing agenda. Let’s see how they like it when they have to compromise and water-down every idea they come up with–just like the left side of the aisle did for the last two years.

Transparency: It’s easy to criticize someone else’s ideas. But when the GOP controls our legislative branch of government, they will finally have to tell us what their ideas actually are. No more “the Democrats shut us out and we can’t get our ideas to the table.” That BS will be over, and the GOP will be required to say to the American people “Here’s what we are going to do. Ideas X, Y, and Z will take care of all our problems.” And the more the Democrats fight against them, the more they will have to explain their ideas and sell their ideas to the people. And their ideas will be laid out on the table for all the Rush Limbaughs and Sarah Palins to defend, and for all the Keith Olbermanns and Rachel Maddows to slice up and dissect each and every day for the next two years. And we the people will finally get some concrete answers to the question: “what would the Republicans do differently to pull us out of the morass this country is in.” They won’t be able to hide behind excuses anymore. Their ideas will be front and center, and it will be their agenda that will be up for debate. For all to see in plain sight.

Closing The Enthusiasm Gap: The most revealing poll out right now as a predictor of the upcomming November mid-term elections is the measurement of voter enthusiasm. Last week a Gallup poll came out that showed 46% of registered Republicans were “very enthusiastic” about voting in the November election, compared to only 23% of registered Democrats. Looks like the left needs a severe wake up call, and now is the time to do it. It’s easy to be complacent when you are in control, so perhaps all the Liberal voters decided that they could stop paying attention. “Yeah, my party is in power so they’ll take care of everything.” That attitude is about to backfire right in their faces. If the left-leaning independent voters and the registered Democrats aren’t worried, then they deserve to lose their edge. American politics are only as secure as the next election, so if you weren’t paying attention to every John Boehner press conference, and every Sarah Palin rally, and every Glenn Beck sideshow, and every FOX news broadcast, and every Tea Party march, well then brothers and sisters of the left you missed a lot. It’s not important how absurd all the conservative idea spittle is, or how inane their platform may be. A lot of voters agree with them, and they intend to vote for them. Once the Democratic voters start hearing a steady stream of tax cuts for the rich, show-me-your-papers immigration solutions, drill baby drill environmental policy plans, let’s overturn Roe v. Wade, it’s time to close down the Dept. of Education, privatize social security, and the end of Medicare, then we will see a fired up and engaged Democratic voter base. They all forgot how pissed off they were in 2008. If the GOP wins big this November, Democrats will have a lot more to be angry about again. And that can be very motivating.

Obama’s Second Term: The net-effect of putting the GOP in control, and putting their “leadership” clearly on display for the next two years will give Barack Obama all the campaign ammunition he needs for 2012: “Are you better off now than you were two years ago?” The answer will be a resounding “NO” if the GOP wins this November, which should teach the Democrats a lesson. I’d rather we spend the next two years taking the GOP to task for the things they do, rather than listen to their empty rhetoric. When you actually have a record to run on, then your opposition has your record to run against. The Democrats will re-take Congress and Obama will win a second term. Then we can really make some progress.

I am willing to sacrifice Hope and Change for the next two years if it will teach the American people (and the Democratic party) a simple lesson:  don’t believe the hype.

Advertisement

Maybe Obama Should Kick Boehner’s Ass (it’s good to be back!)

Not that anyone noticed, but this blog has been on hiatus since April 28 since the writer (me in the 3rd person) has been too busy making a living at his real job. But that’s not to say I have had my head in the sand all that time, except for a week in Boca Raton when I literally had my head in the sand on those beautiful, un-BP-tarnished beaches. I’ve been following the news, and letting my mind wander back and forth across the political spectrum, trying to suss-out what the hell all those mopes in DC are up to. Or in the case of this Congress, what they are NOT up to.

So much has happened with the horrific BP disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. So much, except coming up with any solutions for stopping the leak, or keeping the ecosystem from being completely destroyed. Most of what has happened has been the ramping up of playing the blame game. BP blames themselves for the oil well exploding, but they also blame Transocean for not building the well correctly in the first place. Transocean is implicitly blaming the Federal Government because the rig was built under the lack of regulatory oversight that would have demanded a relief well to be dug initially, albeit for twice the cost.

The Democrats are blaming W, because the oil industry was de-regulated “under his watch”. And the GOP is blaming Obama, even going so far as to shamefully call it “Obama’s Katrina”, because “he isn’t getting pissed off enough”. They want more political theater from him, or as Pat Buchanan calls it, “leadership”. If angry = leadership, then happy = lack of leadership. Maybe that’s why W always had a goofy smile on his face.

This whole notion that Obama needs to get angry so that the people think he is doing something is ridiculous. Nevertheless, he was goaded into saying that he wanted to know who’s ass he should kick by Matt Lauer on the Today Show. How silly, and what a waste of political energy.

But then along comes my favorite political jerk, John Boehner (R-Ohio). Today, while pivoting back to the economy, he said “I think it’s time for Democrats here on Capitol Hill to start listening to the American people. They want spending cut and they want it cut now. And I’m wondering, why isn’t the president looking for someone’s ‘ass to kick’ on this subject?”

Okay Johnny, let’s start with you. As one of the leaders of the party of NO, why don’t you start by telling us what you’d like to cut. Since Republicans come with aversions to raising taxes as a factory-installed operating feature, please tell me what you’d like to cut.

Entitlements like Social Security, Medicaid, or Veterans’ benefits? Try it and your career is over. Maybe we should cut education so America can slip further into stupidity and let China and India eat us for lunch. Let’s cut infrastructure so more bridges can collapse in Minnesota. Let’s cut defense in the middle of two ill-conceived wars. Let’s cut the homeland security budget so that Times Square can get blown up by illegal immigrants coming in from Mexico (we’ll call that one a two-fer). Can we repeal TARP and let all the big banks fail so we can actually slide into the economic depression the bailouts prevented? No? Well we can’t cut healthcare because the reform hasn’t really started to kick in yet, but go ahead and try that one out before the November mid-terms. See how that position benefits your party. Will your party’s candidates have the balls to run on that platform? I doubt it.

So then tell me John Boehner, what would you like to cut? If it were up to me, I’d start by completely cutting the salaries of all the do-nothing politicians who have contributed nothing towards developing a solution for any of the myriad disastrous problems this country faces right now. And the first one on my list would be you, Boehner.

The US Political Spectrum: 2010

Do you get confused when people use terms like “Socialist“, “Moderate“, “Democrat“, and “Tea Party“? Does it seem oxymoronic (with emphasis on the moronic part) to accuse someone of being a “Communist“, while emulating a “Fascist”  dictator like Adolph Hitler at the same time? Is the media “Liberal” or “Independent“? How come conservationists are hardly ever “Conservative“, and why are “Republicans” typically in support of big corporations instead of the Republic? And do the “Progressives“ actually make any progress?

Here’s a handy guide to help you understand the state of politics–The US Political Spectrum: 2010. Now complete with a “Tea Party” addition and the actual definition of “Socialism”. Suitable for printing and saving, for those times when you are dragged into an impromptu civics debate, or start a drunken political argument at Thanksgiving dinner, or when you are simply taking in the latest punditry on either FOX News or MSNBC. It’s YOURS FREE–just for reading Voting Mad!

Going from LEFT to RIGHT, here’s what it all means, including some key players and controversies. Refer to the chart above, and see if you can figure out where you fit into politics as we know it in modern day America:

COMMUNISM: Putting the fear of Karl Marx into people from around 1917 until the day the Berlin Wall fell, Communists were the boogey-men of the infamous Red Scare in the 1950s. Derived from the word commune, Communists believe in advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs. Unless you are a party boss, in which case you live like a king while destroying your political enemies. The USSR was the mother-of-all Communist regimes, until they decided to embrace mafioso-style corruption, wear western clothing, and experiment with Democracy. Now they are broke, less powerful, and more strung out on Vodka and prostitution than ever before. But hey–at least they have a whole new generation of rich oligarchs who are living proof that if you can make it in Russia, you can dominate anyone anywhere. About the only legitimate Communist countries left now are China and Cuba. China is now a global economic powerhouse and basically the lien holder of the entire US of A, while Cuba boasts some of the best public education and healthcare in the entire world. But just try to buy a home in either one of those countries and you risk your life, or become indebted to a black-market warlord. Famous Communists: Josef Stalin, Mao Zedong, and anyone who marched against the Vietnam War in the 1960s.

SOCIALISM: One might be brainwashed by now to first think of Barack Obama as a Socialist–after all, such geniuses as Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity all said he is because he wants to make healthcare affordable and lower taxes for the middle class. But read the definition of socialism and you’ll see this can’t be so: a political and economic theory of social organization advocating the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. “Regulation” seems like a pretty smart word. So does “community”, and “organization”. But not if you are rich. Then those words start to mean “rules for other people to live by”, “those people outside my fence”, and “unions=death to the individual”. Socialism’s core aims to protect and serve everyone equally. If “Protect and Serve” sounds familiar, it’s because that phrase just happens to adorn many publicly-funded police cars in many towns, cities, and rural counties across America. Having publicly-funded (ie: funded by taxes) municipal services are a foundation of American life. Famous Socialist programs: the United States Federal Government, police, fire and rescue services, the military, education, bridges, roads and tunnels, sewers, Federal Parks, Social Security and Medicare, the Post Office, scientific research funding grants, and coming soon to a President’s desk near you…healthcare industry reform!

LIBERALS: Archie Bunker hated Liberals. Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh hate Liberals. Liberals even hate Liberals. A Liberal is someone who has made too good of a living to be a Socialist. Not necessarily rich, but not angry enough to protest either. A Liberal is the conscience of the Democratic Party. Liberty, or liberte as in “Liberté, égalité, fraternité”, French for “Liberty, equality, fraternity (brotherhood)” is the whole reason America has for being in existence. It’s so bizarre that some Americans hate the French (see Conservatives and Tea Party), when you consider that they helped save our butts in the Revolutionary War and influenced the essence of our culture. A Liberal hates killing people so much that they want to outlaw guns completely, they want to end the death penalty, and they are anti-political assassinations–even for people like Saddam Hussein. But don’t mess with abortion rights! Liberals are everybody from the welfare queens to gay couples to Greenpeace donors to San Francisco Mayors to blue collar workers to Riesling-sipping adjunct professors at New England Universities. Famous Liberals: Al Gore, George Soros, Hendrik Hertzberg, Howard Dean, Kweisi Mfume, Arianna Huffington, Noam Chomsky, Paul Krugman, Tavis Smiley, Teresa Heinz-Kerry, Tom Daschle, Tom Hanks, and every single goddamned page ever published by the New York  f***ing Times!

DEMOCRATS: This is the “left wing” of politics. The Democratic Party is one of the world’s oldest political parties and is the party with the lengthiest record of continuous operation in the United States. Thomas Jefferson helped create the Democrats in opposition to the Federalist government and Alexander Hamilton’s fiscal policies. Democrats opposed a national bank and wealthy interests. Most people think of liberals when they think of Democrats, however most of the history of the racist south is told by Southern Democrats, or “Dixie-Crats”. Lincoln was a Republican after all. LBJ was the guy who really changed the identity of the Democrats by getting so much accomplished in his one lone term. And he did it with Socialist entitlement programs like Social Security, and by signing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which he predicted would “…sign away the South for 50 years.” But LBJ also oversaw some of the worst moments and bloodiest mistakes of the Vietnam War. Democrats today are an odd bunch because they don’t know if they need to be Liberal, Progressive, Independent, or what they call “Blue Dog”. For example, President Obama is a Progressive Democrat. Joe LIEberman was almost the Democratic Vice President of the USA, but then he became an Independent who votes “NO” with the GOP on healthcare, and votes “YES” to war. Vermont’s Bernie Sanders is an Independent, but sounds like a Liberal and caucuses with the Democrats, and Evan Bayh is a Blue Dog Democrat, otherwise known as a Conservative. Bill Clinton was a Democrat’s Democrat-smart, tough, and real like FDR. But he was also like JFK in that he couldn’t keep his pants on. Speaking of not wearing pants, John Edwards could have redefined what it meant to be a Democrat–self made, defender of the poor, smart, southern, and rich enough to empathize with a Republican base below the Mason-Dixie Line. But John Edwards would have destroyed the party if he and John Kerry would have been elected in 2004, just like how he destroyed not just one but both of his families, and earning himself a lifetime spot in the  “WTF Were You Thinking” hall of fame, right next to disgraced ex-Governor of New York Elliott Spitzer. The Democrats are always the smartest people in the room, but too stupid to pay their whores to stay quiet.

PROGRESSIVES: Most people don’t know that there already was an established Progressive Party, which was founded in 1912 by none other than President Theodore Roosevelt. The Progressives trace their political roots back to workers’ rights and the emergence of Union protections and safety regulations. They are more conservative than Liberals, despite their name. When one thinks Progressively, one usually thinks of innovation and invention, and you know, progress. You would not expect Progressives to be the most centrist democrats, but they are. What makes them this way are their unquenchable thirst for making bi-partisan deals and working with their political enemies. Is that progressive? Is that their radical idea–make friends first, then ask for votes on legislation later? I don’t know why these folks are called Progressive. They’re no more Liberal than a Liberal, and they believe in a women’s right to choose, laws against concealed handguns, healthcare reform legislation, gay marriage, and financial regulations. Sounds almost like a real Liberal. But Progressives are different from Liberals. Liberals get things done, progressives make talk shows about getting things done. For example, the most famous Progressives are all on TV: John Stewart, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow,  and David Gergen are some of the best-known and most Progressive thinkers out there. By contrast, there is not one single politician who would call themselves a Progressive right now without running the risk of ending up like Ralph Nader-he speaks the truth, but you don’t want to be caught hanging out with him.

INDEPENDENTS: Independents are the middle finger of the political spectrum. An Independent effectively says “I have no party loyalty”, and in a close vote I can put you over the top or ruin your dream. Independents tend to caucus with Democrats, but as referenced above this is not always so. JoeLIEberman is an Independent ex-Democrat who caucuses with the GOP. Vermont’s Bernie Sanders is an Independent and is more Liberal than most politicians anywhere. And New York City’s lovable Mayor Michael Bloomberg, self-made billionaire and media mogul, got elected as a Republican because there were no openings to challenge the party structure for him to run naturally as a Democrat. Now he is an Independent and the city has never been in better shape. And to think that this party was started by a spandex-wearing ex-pro wrestler in Minnesota named Jessie?

MODERATE: Moderates are often referred to as RINOs (Republican In Name Only), and are viewed as equals to the Liberal by traditional Republican standards. Moderates are not typically extreme, partisan, or radical. They do not always vote with mainstream Republicans, and are always thought of as the only ones capable of preventing legislative gridlock. Moderates are really the best examples of open-mindedness, fairness, and bi-partisanship that we have  in this country. Moderates are the voices of reason, the champions of compromise, and the defenders of rational discussion. Examples of Political Moderates: …

REPUBLICANS: The Grand Old Party. The Party of Lincoln, and Reagan…and Nixon too! And Gingrich and Karl Rove. George H.W. Bush and his boy W. Eisenhower, Teddy Roosevelt, and Herbert Hoover. And Ford. John McCain was the darling of the political Right in 2008 until he picked a more conservative running mate named Sarah Palin. Then he was exposed as a nitwit with shoddy judgement. A Republican believes in “America..love it or leave it.” Republicans believe they are the true patriots of this country. Republicans think that smaller government is the way to go, and free markets need to be free. Because freedom is everything. That’s right, Republicans believe no government should ever be able to take away your freedom and they are against government intervention of any kind. To a Republican government is the enemy of freedom, and that government should stay out of the lives of ordinary people. Unless those ordinary people want an abortion, or are gay and want to get married. And Republicans believe that government has no right to regulate guns, healthcare, or even the banking sector. But they go full-contact government to make sure the pledge of alligience always includes the line “under God” or that coins minted by the US Treasury always include the phrase “In God We Trust”. So it’s tricky with the Republican party. They are against government intrusion in our lives, but are actually for government intrusion when it comes to sex and religion. So if you run a huge bank or a corporation that ruins the lives of thousands and millions of people because you were allowed to run wild and unregulated, then that’s just free market capitalism. But if you are a homosexual that wants to get married to your partner of 30 years because you love each other, that is a threat to the very fabric of American life and the Government needs to step in protect the people of this great land. Republicans: God, Guns, and Good-Ol’ Hypocracy.

CONSERVATIVES: A Conservative is a Republican on religious steroids. Conservatives can quote the bible better than they can quote the Constitution. And Conservatives love to rationalize their decision making process by tracing everything back to God. Conservatives don’t want things to change, and would prefer it if this country stayed exactly the way it was–the way it was in 1850. Gays can’t get married in the US because the bible says so. Conservatives believe in the institution of marriage for heterosexuals only. They believe that homosexuality is a sin, but infidelity is just an indescretion. After all, men have been cheating on their wives since before time. It even says so in the bible. Score one for the conservatives. Mark Sanford, John Ensign, John McCain, Newt Gingrich, Larry Craig (who cheated with men, and therefore may not be eligible for the Conservative Unfaithfulness Exemption), David Vitter, Dan Burton, Dan Crane, Henry Hyde, and Mark Foley have all claimed to be “Family Values Conservatives” and then they cheated on their wives. Gays can’t get married, but these guys can all go out and cheat on their wives. The only thing Conservatives don’t conserve is semen.

Tea Party Conservatives: These are Conservatives on LSD. They have delusions of the US government taking over. They believe in death panels, and they believe Sarah Palin would make a great President. Tea Partiers are scarier than a Hells Angels biker rally because they are just as psychotic and they believe they have God on their side. They talk about starting a revolution again, and they hate Obama with a passion. They are anti-immigration, anti-taxes, anti-globalization, and anti-intelligence. The Tea Party worships Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, FOX News, and believe they aren’t just entitled to their own opinions, but their own facts as well. The Tea-Party calls Obama’s healthcare reform both “socialized medicine” and “Nazi healthcare”, which if you look up at the spectrum chart I have provided you will see that is impossible. So it appears the Tea Partiers are also apparently anti-education as well.

FASCISM: Far out on the fringes of the political Right are the Fascists. Fascists believe in purity of the nation and strive for one-party rule over a homogenized population. That’s where Hitler and Mussolini came in. Hitler believed that one party could rule a nation of Aryans, and ultimately take over the world to create one human race. Sounds a little like Reagan’s casting call for the “Morning In America” commercial he put out in 1984. But Ronald Reagan was no Fascist. At least Fascists care about their own people. Reagan didn’t seem to give a damn about anyone.

So that’s our blog post on The US Political Spectrum: 2010. Check back in 10 years and we’ll see what the political landscape looks like. Unless we’ve all killed each other by then.

The Big Government Myth

Ronald Reagan: “Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.”

Bill Clinton: “The era of big government is over.”

Hypocrisy is the name of the game when politicians deride so-called “Big Government”. Republicans are often characterized as anti-big government, free-market capitalists who believe that if you put the power in the hands of the people the people will govern themselves. Democrats are thought of as reluctant big government advocates, who are forced to over-regulate everything because the people need government to keep the playing field level; they don’t want to grow the size of the government, but circumstances dictate the need to do so.

Fact: Democrats and Republicans both LOVE big government, each in their own way. Democrats love big-government for social programs, and Republicans love big government for military spending.

Exhibit A: In his eight years in office, Ronald Reagan increased government spending by 69 percent. He increased defense spending by 92% to force a stalemate with the USSR. By 1989 the US economy was growing, and so yes the size of government spending as a percentage of the economy had indeed shrunk under Reagan–an anemic decrease from 22.2% to 21.2%. Bottom line–US government spending was over 20% of the economy when he took office and it was over 20% the day he left. Conclusion: Reagan supported “Big Government” and failed to live up to his “government is the problem” mantra.

Exhibit B: From 1993 to 2001 Bill Clinton increased government spending by 32%, including only a 4% increase in defense spending–the cold war was over and 9/11 was unimaginable at the time. But Clinton’s numbers benefit from a booming economy that equated to a government spending decrease from 21.4% to 18.5%. In my book a 2.9% decrease is a wash when you factor in the technology boom of the internet and the lack of any serious military threat. Bottom line: Clinton’s government spent more than his predecessors, just like Reagan.

W increased government spending by 68% including a 126% increase in defense spending, and Obama’s spending is scraping almost 22% of the economy–so they are both infected by Big Government-itis.

Here’s the point: with over 300,000,000 people under its responsibility, the US Federal Government needs to spend money so that we have a well-protected, well-served, functioning American way of life. Democrats and Republicans pointing fingers at each other does no good because both sides are guilty. Got an enemy? Spend money on the military. Got a bad economy? Spend money so the whole ship doesn’t sink. Big government is only bad when it wastes money, but that is why we have elections–if you don’t like the stewardship of your tax dollars then elect someone else with better fiscal principals. The size of government is not the issue, it’s the management of the government we should be concerned with. When you put it in that context, as long as it takes care of the problem there is nothing terribly wrong with big-government spending.

But there is something terribly wrong with big-government bullshit.

Miranda Rights and Wrongs

It seems like every week there’s a new episode of political “gotcha”. This week features the Democrats and Republicans arguing over reading suspected terrorists their Miranda Rights, specifically regarding the dust-up over the “Christmas Bomber” Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab (remember: even if a whole plane of people watched you try to ignite a bomb in your underwear, you are still considered a suspect until you’ve been convicted).

When he was pulled off of the flight to Detroit and handed over to the FBI, Abdulmutallab was Mirandized. In other words, he was advised of his right to remain silent, and how his words could be used against him, and that he had the right to speak with an attorney before answering any questions for his own protection (you can read the actual Miranda warnings guidelines here). This sent all the politicians into major spin mode:

GOP: We can’t give terrorists the same rights as regular criminals!

DEMS: But Timothy McVeigh was a terrorist and he was Mirandized!

GOP: Yeah but he was an AMERICAN terrorist!

DEMS: But W’s FBI read Shoe Bomber Richard Reid his Miranda rights!

GOP: Reid was an American! (Newt Gingrich actually said this)

DEMS: No he wasn’t–he was British!

GOP: Was not!

DEMS: Was so!

GOP: Nya-nya-nya!

DEMS: Up yours!

(Okay, so that ending is not an actual transcript of an actual dialogue, but to most Americans that’s what the constant partisan bickering sounds like.)

Bottom line: your Miranda Rights are guaranteed when you are taken into custody for interrogation by the cops or the FBI, whether you are a US citizen or a foreigner. Don’t believe me? Well here’s a link to the US Constitution and the Bill Of Rights where you can see for yourself (trust me, I read it).

And here’s the punchline: after being Mirandized, Abdulmutallab sang like a bird and gave the FBI all sorts of juicy information such as the names and locations of key players in Al Qaeda. The FBI did the right thing and got the kind of information that we actually need to fight the war on terror.

If you don’t like the rules, then amend the Constitution. Otherwise shut the hell up. After all, you have the right to do so.

The World In The Palm of Palin’s Hand

It’s kind of a modern-day version of Nero playing the fiddle while Rome burned.

If you want a great example of why nothing ever gets accomplished in this country, just look at these two photos and guess which one is the lead story in American news media.

If you guessed “Iran commits to increasing it’s enriched uranium to 20%” you’d be dead wrong (pun intended).

Uranium enriched to 20% is nuclear weapons-grade. Yeah, yeah, I know Ahmadinejad says this is for “peaceful reasons” such as energy development and creating isotopes for treating cancer patients. There’s also a bridge in Tehran he’d like to sell me.

Meanwhile over in Teabag-ville, the media is obsessed with Sarah Palin’s address to the Tea Party summit this weekend and how she had to write talking points on her hand so she could “stay on message”. We all know that she’s a nitwit, but she’s a powerful nitwit in the political world so we can’t seem to focus on the things that really matter. Like that pesky little guy in Iran thumbing his nuclear nose at the rest of us.

Something about this smacks of our pre-9/11 distraction to me. While Bill Clinton was being impeached for his affair with Intern Lewinsky, our whole country and the Western world took our collective eyes off the ball, allowing Al Qaeda to infiltrate the US and put their murderous plot into action.

My point here is that our government is so deeply mired in politics, that it’s now impossible for them to do the peoples’ business. Instead of reforming healthcare, they’re too busy bickering about procedure. Instead of creating jobs, they’re trying to save their own. And instead of putting the time and energy required into dealing with world peace and terrorism and domestic safety, they’re obsessed with playing a dangerous game called “gotcha”.

If Congress and the President could spend 100% of their energy and focus on the issues instead of reacting to what Sarah Palin said to the Tea Party, or what Nancy Pelosi said about John Boehner, or what Mitch McConnell said about Rham Emmanuel, maybe the world would be a safer place. Maybe we’d have affordable healthcare. Maybe Iran would comply with the rest of the world’s wishes. Maybe the recession would have never happened.

Until we as a country smarten up and focus on the issues instead of the ideologues, we can expect the world to become an even more dangerous place. Ahmadinejad watches CNN too, so he knows we’re not paying enough attention to him.

BOOM!

If This War Was Mine

The other night I sadly watched my President deliver his Afghanistan speech on TV at West Point. It was probably one of the lowest points in his entire career. Here is a man who has just won the Nobel Peace Prize, telling the world he is going to escalate a war. This is Barack Obama’s “Sophie’s Choice”: ramp up the war and become the next LBJ, or bring home the troops and join the ranks of world leaders who have been defeated in Afghanistan throughout history.

This is a lose-lose proposition no matter what. At the end of the day we are still at war. But I knew Obama was gonna catch heat from all sides no matter what he decided to do, and that’s what is already happening: the left is mad because we’re sending in more troops, and the right is mad because we’re talking about time-tables.

The reality is that Obama is doing EXACTLY what he said he was going to do in the 2008 campaign–pulling out of Iraq (a “war of choice”), and getting serious in Afghanistan (a “war of necessity”). I think that W/Cheney took their eyes off the ball in Afghanistan when we foolishly invaded Iraq, and now we need to do what should have been done years ago. However, it’s now really too late to do “what we should have done” because after eight years of neglect, our real enemies in Afghanistan–the Taliban and Al Qaeda–are probably in Pakistan, doing everything possible to overthrow the government there to get their hands on the Pakistani nukes. That’s what scares me.

I’ve said all along that after 9/11 the US military should have surrounded two countries–Afghanistan (don’t let anyone out) and America (don’t let anyone in). Defense is the best offense in this situation, because I don’t believe we can go overseas and stop terrorists and jihadists where they live and breathe and where they have a cultural connection to the people there.

If this war was mine here’s what I would do:

1. Pull out of Afghanistan and Iraq TODAY. Tell the world that we can no longer do this on our own, and that we need to focus on nation building back home in the USA, which has been devastated economically by the last eight years of endlessly fighting two wars.

2. Take our military and monetary resources and beef up our own borders, immigration services, CIA/FBI intelligence gathering, domestic anti-terrorism forces, and guard our turf locally. I am tired of the argument that we need to go where the terrorists are plotting against us to disrupt their plans. Bullship (I promised my mom I wouldn’t curse in this blog anymore)! Let them plot and plan all they want from thousands of miles away. If they can’t carry out their plots on American soil because we stopped them from getting in, then we will be much safer than ever before. Remember, 9/11 was successful because the terrorists were already here for a long time freely plotting their mission.

3. Commit every remaining dollar and personnel to recovering and securing loose nuclear weapons and materials around the world. This also means somehow working with the Pakistani government to make sure they help us. If this means financial aid then let’s cut them a check. If it means diplomatic support, then let’s give Pakistan the biggest hug we can. Keep our friends close and our enemies closer. We need to lead the world in non-violence and diplomatic solutions to gain back respect and end anti-American hatred around the world. We need Pakistan to be concerned about terrorists overthrowing their own government and keeping their nuclear weapons secure. If the terrorists can’t get them, and if they can’t get inside America, then we have nothing to fear.

4. Once and for all we need a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I am a Jew with Israeli relatives, and even I believe that the Palestinians need their own country. I believe that this issue is at the heart of what caused 9/11. Islamic Jihadist groups hate America for allowing Israel to continue shutting out the Palestinians and denying them their own homeland. I can’t say i blame them. Many Israeli’s are sick of the conflict and the effect it has had on their lives as well. Peace in the Middle East means peace–period.

Maybe I am simplifying things, but this is what I wish we could do. I know it’s neither politically nor practically possible, but it makes more sense to me than what Obama may have ultimately been forced to do.

Generation Cleanup

Ten years ago today I became a father, and by doing so I have left my indelible mark on society. Long after I am gone my two children will still roam the earth and try to live a good life in the wake of those who came before them. That’s what every generation does. We are all born amidst the circumstances and conditions that were created by those who came before us, and we have to live our lives either prospering from the ways of the world, or trying to make things better for ourselves in spite of the hand we are dealt.

Politicians like to fret over the budget deficit by saying “we can’t saddle future generations with our debt”, or “we can’t punish our children and grandchildren by making them pay off our excesses”. They say we can’t kick the can down the road for someone else to deal with. That is why politicians are up in arms about the bailouts, health reform, and deficit spending. They contend that government can’t afford to invest more money in fixing the economy right now because future generations will spend their lives paying off this debt.

I say that this is a baseless argument for two reasons.

First of all, unless we fix the economy NOW, my children will have far worse problems to deal with in the future. For example, if the economy continues to go south and I lose my job then my children will be at a huge disadvantage. We lose our home, their lives will be severely disrupted, and their future will be uncertain. Plenty of studies show that children whose parents struggle economically often turn to drugs, crime, and (for girls) are more likely to become pregnant teens. I would argue that these conditions are far worse than my kids dealing with higher taxes and inflation as adults when their generation has to pay off government debt. If they have good careers and healthy lives then they will have the ability to deal with it. It won’t be ideal, but it will be possible.

Secondly, “passing the buck” is a part of American history. The “Greatest Generation” dealt with cleaning up the Great Depression and fighting World War Two. The Baby Boomers helped remake the US economy by transforming us from a manufacturing and agricultural society to an information and technology society. Generation X (my generation) has to struggle with the looming transformation of the healthcare industry and its impact on the economy, while the country’s financial resources are evaporating under the heat of fighting two misguided and seemingly endless wars. And my children (and probably my grandchildren) will be paying the tab throughout their adult lives.

But that scenario is far better than having them struggle through poverty as children. The US government needs to invest more money where the US consumers currently can not. Otherwise there will be nothing left for our children to deal with when they are old enough to do so.

That’s the true way of life as Americans. It doesn’t matter who’s fault it is, and it doesn’t matter when it gets cleaned up (unless China decides to call us on the debt we owe them, which will never happen because they will lose their biggest global customer and plunge the world into economic oblivion). We need to get through right now with some semblance of normalcy so that our children have a decent life to grow up strong enough so they can have a decent chance to actually pay for our sins. And besides, after generations of mounting debt, it would be more unfair to suddenly say “this is wrong, we must clean this up right now” and start slashing things like infrastructure, social services, and more jobs. That would be far worse that pushing it off for another time.

So I say we keep kicking the can down the road until future generations are strong enough and better suited to pick up that can and throw it in the trash where it belongs. Spending beyond our means is wrong, but so is ruining the lives of generations that aren’t at fault for the situation they were born into. Let’s give them a fighting chance.

Bang-Bang! We’re all dead.

Yesterday in Pine Plains, NY a man with a gun took a high school principal hostage, apparently in response to his son being suspended from the school. Fortunately, no one was hurt and the police now have this would-be shooter in custody. There were approximately 600 students, teachers and faculty in the school at that time. According to CNN.com the suspect has a local police record.

On Friday a man walked into his former place of business in Orlando, FL and started shooting a handgun. He killed one person and wounded 5 others. Apparently he was taking revenge for being fired from the company two years ago for “performance issues”. As police took him into custody he muttered “I’m just going through a tough time right now. I’m sorry.”

Everyone in America not living underneath a rock has heard about the shootings at Fort Hood last week.

And tonight at 9pm EST, John Allen Muhammad (AKA the “Beltway Sniper” from 2002) will be executed for killing 10 people. He claims to be innocent, even though his 17 year old accomplice at the time testified against him.

Of course I could also mention Columbine, and the 1000s of other horrible episodes of gun violence that happen in this country every year. But I won’t because it’ll just make me sick.

There are many ways to obtain firearms in the USA–legally, illegally, or in the grey areas that exist at gun shows with their lack of background checks and abundance of loopholes. Guns can’t be stopped because after all, the Constitution says we all have the right to own a gun. I know plenty of folks who own guns and the majority of them are hunters, but all of the gun owners I know are law-abiding and decent folks who would never kill someone unless it was in self-defense. They lock up their guns and take great care to be safe with them.

But what about all the nuts out there who “go postal” everyday on their former co-workers, wives and girlfriends, classmates, kids, and innocent bystanders? What will we do to prevent people from getting their hands on a gun and playing God (although I suspect that God would never use a gun to make a point)? Why do they have the right to own a gun? It’s not like the British are coming over the hill to attack us anymore, and our military and police forces are here to act as the militias that the Constitution said we might need to assemble. Those days are long gone.

How come we all have the “right” to own a gun, but you need a license to go fishing? How come criminals laugh at gun laws? How come the NRA is so powerful? How come Japan and the UK have outlawed guns and they have a much lower murder rate in their countries than we do? Is it because it takes more nerve to stab someone to death than it does to shoot them from a distance?

I don’t have the answers to any of these questions, but I know that I hate guns. I hate how easy guns make it for people to resolve their violent and twisted issues. And I hate the way guns make cowards very powerful.

So as long as guns are available we will continue to see more violence and killing by people without the intelligence or stability to resolve their personal problems in a humane and civilized way.

Because of the randomness of so many gun crimes, everyone in this country has a theoretical target on their back. So good luck to us all. It’s a jungle out there, and everyone of us is being hunted whether we–or the shooters–know it or not.

And that is guaranteed by law.

UPDATE: Only a mere 3 hours after this entry was first posted, and there has been another shooting. This time in an office park in Oregon. Two people are reported dead by MSNBC.com.

When will we wake up as a country and stop the madness?

Maine, Maine go away…

“…the institution of marriage has been preserved in Maine, and across this nation.”

When Frank Schubert, the campaign manager for “Stand For Marriage Maine”, uttered those words last night he must’ve thought pretty highly of himself. I mean, it’s not everyday that you get to “save” an entire institution that impacts just about every single human being on the planet.

Scott Fish, a spokesman for the group, said the campaign had never been anti-gay. “The campaign was very clear about that,” he said. “This was a campaign about protecting traditional marriage.”

Ah, but Mr. Fish’s statement is very telling in his use of the word “protecting”, as if homosexual people are out to harm marriage. As if two gay people who love each other and want to share their life together will have any detriment to my own marriage. I’ve always been confused about this. I have a close friend who is gay and he has been with the same partner for 25 years–much longer than many “traditional marriages” last. They love each other and want to be together for the rest of their lives. They live in Minnesota, so they are not legally married, but the way they live their life actually makes my marriage stronger because they are promoting the ideal of commitment. Their relationship is a beautiful thing and should be a standard for the way “straight” people live.

On the other hand, I have another friend who has been married and divorced twice. He has a child with his first wife, who ultimately went on to marry someone else who was also divorced. This divorced friend of mine has actually weakened my marriage because he is proof of just how flimsy this institution really is. People jump in and out of marriages so often that the pillar of this institution–commitment–is meaningless. Wasn’t he paying attention to the “until death do us part” line? That is the crux of the whole thing–that no matter how tough life gets, you will always be able to depend on the person you married to be there for you. It isn’t “until someone better comes along do us part.” It isn’t “until I can’t deal with your BS anymore do us part.” It isn’t “until we realize that we made a mistake do us part.” Marriage is supposed to be the ultimate commitment, and that’s all that matters in this debate.

I make no judgements against divorced people–my own parents are divorced, and I have several friends who are divorced. And I think that it’s better to divorce than to be miserable for the rest of your life, especially if there are children involved. But for all these activist groups to claim that they are “protecting” marriage by barring an entire segment of our society from making a loving commitment to each other is just a coverup for homophobia. They claim it’s dangerous to re-define marriage because that will open the floodgates for adults to marry children or animals. That’s just nonsense. The only way to define marriage in it’s truest sense is “the monogamous union of two adult human beings.” It has nothing to do with how you have sex.

Let’s just call banning gay marriage what it really is: discrimination. And let’s just call an institution that is defined by lifelong commitment, but comes with an out clause just in case, what it really is: hypocrisy.

The only way to really protect the institution of marriage is to make divorce illegal.