What the Trump

I've been thinking that Trump is the result of Republican politics for awhile now, and this article sums it up nicely. To wit:

But note well: Donald Trump is not a black swan, an unforeseen event erupting upon an unsuspecting Republican Party. He is the end result of conscious and deliberate choices by the GOP, going back decades, to demonize its opponents, to polarize and obstruct, to pursue policies that enfeeble the political weal and to yoke the bigot and the ignorant to their wagon and to drive them by dangling carrots that they only ever intended to feed to the rich. Trump’s road to the candidacy was laid down and paved by the Southern Strategy, by Lee Atwater and Newt Gingrich and Karl Rove, by Fox News and the Tea Party, and by the smirking cynicism of three generations of GOP operatives, who have been fracking the white middle and working classes for years, crushing their fortunes with their social and economic policies, never imagining it would cause an earthquake. […]

But they don’t control Trump, which they are currently learning to their great misery. And the reason the GOP doesn’t control Trump is that they no longer control their base. The GOP trained their base election cycle after election cycle to be disdainful of government and to mistrust authority, which ultimately is an odd thing for a political party whose very rationale for existence is rooted in the concept of governmental authority to do. The GOP created a monster, but the monster isn’t Trump. The monster is the GOP’s base. Trump is the guy who stole their monster from them, for his own purposes.

Republicans see compromise as failure. Until that changes, I won't ever vote Republican.

Fire the HHS Secretary

Health and Human Services secretary Sebelius should be fired. She is in charge of the agency rolling out Obamacare and that's been a bomb so far. And her performance on the Daily Show last night was a talking-points riddled mess of ineptitude. General McChrystal was fired for less. Now don't get me wrong, I support Obamacare despite it's many wrinkles and warts. But three years of prep, and "This website is currently down" is the best the Feds can do?

Does the GOP get it?

It's been a few months, but nothing has changed. The GOP seems to want to doom itself. They lose another presidential election, lose seats in the Senate, and hold onto the House because of gerrymandering and redistricting. Yet the most vocal in the party still think they have sway. They don't.


Here's why I won't vote for the current GOP:

1. This is the biggest bunch of sore losers I have ever seen. They LOST, yet they whine about  how they don't get much respect. Four years of hate spewing disrespect for the President and they just keep going at it like it's the right thing to do. No thanks.
2. Trying to use the debt limit as a negotiation tactic is wrong. It's  wrong to vote for a budget (or continuing resolution or whatever they do to get money out the door in this current era of deadlock) that spends more than the government takes in, then refuse to pay for the bill by taking out debt. CONGRESS spends money, not the President. Yet the current leadership says the debt limit increase should be like an allowance. Why is it OK for anyone in government pass off this kind of ignorant behavior as acceptable? They KNOW how the system works. Pandering to a perceived idiot constituency is disrespectful to every citizen and way too cynical for someone in national office.
3. Thinking that a government shutdown would show the President who is in charge is just dumb. Didn't work in 1995, didn't work in 2011 and it won't work now. 

No thanks, GOP. You have lost 5 of the last 6 presidential elections, and you will lose again. Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, the Tea Party, and old people is not the way forward.

Death of a party and other notes

Like many other parties before it, the current version of the GOP is dying. The countries demographics are changing, and the party of grumpy old white men is not going to survive in my lifetime. It will take awhile, maybe a few years, but this current party can't survive. It might take down the Democratic party with it, but that wouldn't be so bad, would it? The Republican party as it now stands offers me nothing in terms of interest or my vote.

Mitt Romney is really doing a great job of embodying the current GOP. I don't know what the man actually thinks. I have always thought that if Romney ran as Governor Romney from Massachusetts, then Obama would have real problems. But Romney gave that up (or was forced to) by the GOP extremists and now sounds small and confused. His comments on the Libya attack on the American Ambassador, his pick of Paul Ryan, his disastrous comments made to the fundraiser luncheon in Boca Raton, his continuous flip flops all demonstrate a person who will conform to what he needs to do to gain support. That might work well in business, but not politics. People know that turning Medicare into a voucher program, but ONLY for those under 55 is not fair. People can smell they hypocrisy. This is the party that cut payroll taxes, then turns around and screams about how few people pay payroll taxes!!

In 2004, gay marriage was used to get people to come out and vote and probably helped elect George W. to another term. W. ran against an elitist, out of touch Democrat from Massachusetts named John Kerry. 8 years later, the GOP trots out Romney, an elitist, out of touch Republican from Massachusetts. And gay marriage is now supported by a majority of Americans.

As Paul Waldman observes:

As I've maintained for some time, for all intents and purposes there is no "real" Mitt Romney. His political beliefs are the equivalent of Schrodinger's cat. They exist in every state at once until you open the box to observe them. If the one opening the box is a Tea Partier, they instantly lock into place as a set of Tea Party beliefs; if it's a bunch of GOP plutocrats staring down, that's whose beliefs he'll mirror. Romney has spent the last five years in an intensive period of study, with his subject the contemporary American conservative mind in all its permutations. He's well aware that the misleading talking point about 47 percent of Americans not paying taxes gets repeated all the time on the right, in private and public. What he was telling the people in that room is what he tells any group of people he speaks to. His message was, in Christine O'Donnell's immortal words, "I'm you."

Of course, when Mitt Romney loses, the GOP will not learn that it's religious zealotry to broken ideology of supply side economics and hate is the problem here. No, it will blame Mitt and try again. How many times will it take for this failure to shake these folks awake? Is America going to be held hostage by this old guard until these folks die of old age and whose ideas are finally swept into the dustbin?

"Sarah Palin would be a great foreign policy advisor [to Mitt Romney]. To her, all policy is foreign." - Steven Colbert

Pity the elites!

It was their upbringing..or whatever according to David Brooks today. Don't punish our elites, but pat them on the head and tell them this mess isn't their fault. If you want to give elites today a different 'ethos', you PUNISH the current crop of idiots and throw them out. That establishes the baseline for the next crop of elites to work against.


I also think that Mr. Brooks is suffering from his inability to admit that he is one of those elites. It is really easy for people who are well off tho waggle their fingers at those who are less fortunate. Hard work doesn't just get you to the top. Luck is a big factor. But to admit that luck and place have helped out is somehow fallen out of favor with a lot of elites, as if that invalidates their efforts. Whatever happened to humility? 

If you’re doing reasonably well, and your life is stable, then it’s likely you’re saving and spending as much as you “like” to. That’s very different than spending as much as you “got” to. Try to remember that the next time you’re lecturing someone you don’t know on how you’re doing a better job than they are.

The quote and link above reminds me of when Mrs. Romney was taking offense to comments that being a stay at home mom is a full-time job and isn't something to use as a put down. So what about all those single and poor mothers who 'should go and find jobs to support their children?'

UPDATE: July 16: Andrew Sullivan nails it on elites and responsibility. He calls out conservatives, but I think that Democrats are doing their best to play catch up here in a lot of ways as well. The money bit:

The reason America's elite finds itself under so much criticism is not that they are elites. It is that they have become self-serving, accountability-free elites.

Whenever someone says 'well, the markets will judge the actions of x' or something along those lines, this is abdication of responsibility. If you do something, you are responsible to see it through. You do not get to claim credit for success if you will not own up to the possibility of failure. Politicians can claim that the electorate will pass judgement on their actions, but if the politician does everything they can to obscure, hide, and exaggerate their actions, then what is being judged is not the reality, but the perception.

Why vote Republican?

And for that matter, why vote Democrat?

Bruce Bartlett does a wonderful job showing how badly Republicans blew up the budget during the Bush years. Obama seems pretty happy to continue these disastrous policies.

David Frum has summed up the Presidential election nicely:

The Democratic message is shaping up as: "The Republicans/the Fed/the Europeans wrecked the recovery, and we weren't smart enough or tough enough to stop them. Vote us."

The Republican message: "Obama could not fix the mess we made. Vote us."

Kid Politics

I love how some conservatives claim that Obama has some kind of brain washing agenda to warp the minds of our youth. This American Life takes a tour of the Regan library and watches elementary kids attempt to reenact the invasion of Grenada. The kids are rewarded for choosing the path Regan took, and not rewarded for choosing otherwise. Who is warping our youth here? I mean, I think this scenario reenacting is a really interesting idea, but putting the kids into these situations and pretending them that they are making the decisions, then psychologically smacking them when they don't follow what actually happened is total BS and just teaches the kids to be sheep and be afraid of making their own decisions.

Contraception

The debate over contraception is really dumb. We've been through this, haven't we? It's moronic to go over it again. The Catholic church has to cover contraception under a number of state laws. It's suddenly a problem when it's a federal law? Come on. Rush Limbaugh is an idiot, but we already knew that. The coverage is not for sex. It's because you can use contraception to treat medical conditions. I overheard 2 VPs in my office talking about this issue. They agreed with the substance of Limbaugh's comments, but not of what he actually said. They don't seem to get it, either. I was tempted to inject myself into the conversation, but I'm just a lowly worm and it didn't seem like the right place to be tossing around the words slut and prostitute. If you have an issue with birth control being covered, then why aren't you livid by the fact that Medicare covers Viagra? That means I'm paying for all the old geezers to have sex! And that has been law since 2005. So spare me your BS over this issue. Or first give up your Viagra, then we can have a conversation.

Making the best of a bad situation

Oh, this is great. Jon Oliver concludes that Romney will be the nominee because Santorum is just too much for the general election. He ties this up by running a clip of Santorum defending his stance on Right to Life even in situations of rape with the idea that everything happens according to God's plan, and that you must make the best of a bad situation. So Republicans must accept Romney because that is God's plan, and they must make the best of a bad situation.

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Indecision 2012 - Rick Santorum's Conservative Rhetoric
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

John Stewart and Jim DeMint discuss things

Stewart did an awesome job confronting DeMint on Republican fallacies. Stewart shows remarkable and keeps his cool while bringing out the facts for DeMint. I'm really, really impressed with his performance here. DeMint's claim that the Bush tax cuts did not lower federal revenue are total bunk. DeMint's concept of how Social Security is sad because it's incorrect. Current retirees did NOT earn what they are pulling out of the system. FICA and payroll taxes go directly to current beneficiaries. It's a direct transfer of wealth from current workers and younger (those under 65) workers to retirees. It was designed that way to make it very, very hard to change either system. Both systems were designed to run deficits. His ideas are wrong because he refuses to grasp reality and facts. I think you could argue that you could make it so that SS and Medicare/Medicaid do not run in the red so much if at all, but the only way to do that without cutting benefits is to raise taxes, which is an absolute no go for all Republicans and many Democrats. Stewart comes back to the fact that the portrayal of Republican ideas that if we restrain free markets in any way is a surefire way to hell, or that raising taxes will immediately make America the next European Bankruptcy is what makes having conversations with folks who believe that so frustrating. Their reality is not based on facts. They claim that 2+2 = 5, and if you say, 'no it's actually 4', they reply 'well, maybe so, but my point is....' That's not way to have a conversation! Yes, we reward those who have merit. Most wealthy in this country earned their wealth by working hard and doing the right things. That's great! But we do live in a society, and to keep that society going so that others might have that same chance, we all need to chip in to maintain what we have got here. Helping out our fellow citizens in some small way is not a prescription for communism nor does it mean that I hate freedom.

Here are all three segments:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive - Jim DeMint Extended Interview Pt. 1
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive - Jim DeMint Extended Interview Pt. 2
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive - Jim DeMint Extended Interview Pt. 3
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

Why people are mad at the rich bankers

People love a success story. Look at the outpouring of grief and support for Steve Jobs' death. What makes people mad is when success is accomplished through cheating or unfairly. Look at how people go NUTS over something as dumb as steroids in sports. We Americans think we have this great idea of what fairness is, and when that fairness is violated, we really get upset. So that is why people on the right and left are really mad at bankers right now. They received bailouts and are now doing very, very well. But the bankers don't get it. Joshua M. Brown over at The Reformed Broker really nails it in this post.

Why do the Republicans even exist?

Robert Reich has an interesting blog post about how damaging it would be if the Republicans destroyed themselves. I don't know...If they took down the people who make sense and aren't bullies, that would be bad. But if they bullies go away how would that be bad? I mean, would it really be a bad thing if the absolute whackos in this country were silenced, or muzzled to a point of irrelevance? The Left has crazies too, but they do not dominate the discussion as the crazies on the Right does. Letting the party implode so that they prove to the country how whacked they are seems like it would allow the saner folks on the right to get back in the driver seat. We have become a country where we let our toddlers throw tantrums anytime they want without any discipline. That is wrong. I was raised better than that. Why is that tolerated now?

Reich's conclusion about needing two parties grounded in reality seems like the happy ideal. I don't think either party is grounded in reality right now. Having one party implode might shake the other party awake and get them grounded. I don't know. All I know is that I am absolutely terrified of what the next year could be for my family, and I'm not seeing much hope. A storm is coming.

Now, on that cheery note: How is it that Republicans can run around SCREAMING about how we need to pay for the payroll tax cut when these same assholes claims that all tax cuts pay for themselves and that offsets are unnecessary? Does that 'pay for itself' logic only apply when when vast majority of tax cuts go to wealthy earners? How about Paul Ryan, who claims to be worried about the federal budget, but was nowhere to be seen with these worries during the Bush Administration and who voted for the Medicare Part D drug plan. A plan whose cost is $400 billion and is completely unfunded except via debt? How does that work, sir? David Frum calls out how silly it's getting when the Wall St. Journal goes after House Republicans over the payroll tax.

On the ABC Sunday political talk show This Week Robert Reich, George Will, Barney Frank, and Paul Ryan debated each other over various topics. It was a good but odd debate. The debate was too short. But I found myself agreeing with Will and Ryan on how to deal with the banks. But if their ideas were proposed by a Democrat, then that Democrat would be called a Socialist by Will and Ryan. Republicans = Cognitive Dissonance.

See the show below:


Part one of the debate:


Part two:


One of the things that I've been wondering is how rich people have gotten so rich. If you look at the ones who earned their wealth not through inheritance, it is easy to come to the conclusion that these are folks that stuck with it through thick and thing, good times and bad, etc. People who are mentally tough and can take some abuse and dish it out. Yet as soon as Obama says that tax rates should go back to the 90's, and that there is income inequality, you see some of these lucky people go on television and whine about how they do agree that taxes should go up, but they are bothered by the tone. Are these folks babies? I don't get it. Life is tough. Shut up and deal with it. I was thinking about this, and then Krugman came to the same conclusion the other day, so that felt like a confirmation of sorts in my thinking.

Rick Perry has started collecting his government pension while still governor of Texas. WTF??? I thought greedy public employees were part of the problem. His response: "It's legal to do this in the state of Texas." Good for you, you douche. What he's saying is 'It's not me. It's THEM that are the problem.' Please go away, Rick Perry.

I can't answer why the Republican party still exists. But maybe Republicans will answer that all by themselves.

Occupy Wall Street

So the protests that started on Wall Street are still going and are going national. This is good. Are these folks the Tea Party equivalent of the Left? I'm having a hard time thinking so. There really isn't much difference between the left and right. Both sides are bought and paid for (left with super strong unions and the right with super strong corporations, with each side sharing the banks. This is simplistic, I know).So what is this movement all about? I'm not sure. Hopefully it can coalesce into something with political clout, cuz sign me up! Let's get money out of politics (Money is NOT Free Speech), let's break up the banks, let's turn off our TVs and get some good discourse going here.

Paul Krugman is saying that these protests are scaring the crud out of the wealthy elites because the elites know how gamed the system is.

Robert Reich is saying that Democrats are going to have a hard time joining with the Occupy Wall Street movement.

While I agree that some of the folks in this movement are a bit misguided, this is no different from those in the Tea Party who demand that the government keep its hands off of Medicare. The 'We are 99%' sub movement is also gaining ground and also has some misguided souls on its tumblr feed. That's ok. All this movement really wants is to bring attention that the current status quo is not sustainable nor inclusive, and the only way to get attention is to exercise a constitutional right and take to the streets. It does not help this movement if it becomes violent, however. If the cops keep aggressively trying to suppress supporters or onlookers, then things will get ugly. (Imagine the potential violence if those over 55 suddenly realize their benefits could be cut. The Horror!!)

A lot of right-wing commentators are saying how OWS is doing things wrong and they should do things differently, but as Yves Smith notes on her blog, the movement continues to spread with favorable media coverage.

Some criticism is being made towards the protectors use of corporate goods. Not all corps are bad, but these critics don't seem to get that and are still stuck in the us vs. them mentality.

And on a sad note, R.I.P. Steve Jobs. You will be missed.

A little disappointment with The Daily Show

Jon Stewart had a favorite guest on his show Wednesday: Bill O'Reilly. This is just a day or two after Stewart showed a clip of O'Reilly saying that if his taxes increase to 50%, he might just quit. So Stewart asked him about this and some other things in the two parts of his interview below:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive - Bill O'Reilly Extended Interview Pt. 1
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

My breakdown of the interview:

So of course O'Reilly fesses up to the fact that he won't quit even if that happens. Of course not. No rich person would. Yet they say they might, and this makes people believe them. Now, I never believed that when I saw the clip, yet folks use that very idea to convince people that they could quit or move away in an effort to keep taxes low. It's BS and the rich know it. The non-rich think "Well, rich people must be smart or they wouldn't be rich, so what they are saying must be true." It's not. Jon did a decent job of trying to tear his argument down here. Bill was really on his game, and much faster than Jon was with quips.

O'Reilly's Solyndra comment was valid, and I though Jon did a decent job of putting the $500 million loan Solyndra got into the correct context. But then Jon should have mentioned all the WASTE that goes into Defense spending. That would have put O'Reilly on the defensive with his own talking point about having the government spend money efficiently. I can't argue against what O'Reilly is talking about when he says he wants to see the government spend money efficiently. How can you? But most politicians DON'T want to see efficiency because their donors will make less money. That's where I take issue with the Right and their ideas of efficiency. Efficiency means CUTS. O'Reilly even brings this up later in the interview, and I think that Stewart rightly puts it into the correct context again.

So then O'Reilly mentions the $16 muffin story. This is complete bunk. ABC news debunked this story here. It's too bad, because Stewart could have nailed him with this one. Disappointed with Stewart. He tried to save face by mentioning the bailouts, but the point was already won by O'Reilly. Stewart tries to paint O'Reilly into the box that most Republicans put themselves into by saying that all regulation is bad and business should be unfettered, but O'Reilly rightly denies that and mentions the efficiency comment again.

End of interview part 1. Part 2:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive - Bill O'Reilly Extended Interview Pt. 2
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

O'Reilly admits that he's a Democrat in terms of Financial regulation. Great. His flat tax wouldn't work, but the VAT (consumption tax) is awesome and we should do that. (Don't mention to him that is what most of Europe (socialists!!) does). O'Reilly's whine about all of the taxes is dumb. It's not the FEDERAL government's fault that his property, state, sales, etc are so high. Jon then brings up the good point about how little the top 1% pay in income taxes. O'Reilly's attempt to hide behind the other taxes he has to pay is lame, because EVERYONE else is paying those taxes too. Rich people pay income taxes because they have all the money.

O'Reilly's 10% across the board cuts is...nuts. A LOT of spending can be cut, but not across the board. Some government programs work a lot better than others.

Stewart should have brought up the class warfare comments that are all over Fox news, then asked him if Eisenhower is a socialist for having a 90% tax on the wealthy after WWII. It's a shame, as I would have enjoyed hearing O'Reilly's comments on the subject. Stewart's constant giggling was a little irritating, and something I wish he did less of that.

Oh well. Overall, a good interview even with a mildly disappointing performance by Stewart. I think O'Reilly has reasonable views, but he is so bombastic that I just can't be a fan.

Who likes Maternity leave?

Megyn Kelly was against Maternity Leave before she was for it. Thank you, Daily Show!

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Lactate Intolerance
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

So Patty Murray is on the Super Congress

I'm trying to decide what to write to Patty Murray, one of my state's Senator's that is on the Super Congress.

I'll post my letter to her here.

Dear Senator Murray,

Congratulations on being named to the Super Congress. I am proud that a Senator from our state has been chosen to this group. As a constituent, I have some points I would like to make.

If gridlock in the SC happens, I will welcome the enormous Defense cuts that will occur as part of the trigger. We spend way too much on defense. I know this would hurt some of our citizens who work for Boeing here in the state, but so be it.

I agree that Medicare needs to be revamped, but the Republican proposals are simply cost shifting and not real solutions. Medicare should be able to negotiate with drug companies and import drugs from Canada. Fee for service is a broken and wasteful delivery model. I'm not sure what good raising the retirement age does. Protecting the current Medicare model for citizens 55 years or older is simply pandering and as a citizen that must pay taxes to support that current model while seeing my future benefits decline is unfair. We ALL must pay a price here, including senior citizens and baby boomers. Another way to save billions a year in Medicare is to strengthen it's fraud investigation branch. 60 minutes ran a story a couple years ago about how easy it is to rip off Medicare with stolen SS numbers, since Medicare must reimburse all claims within 30 days. The fraud enforcement office of Medicare is underfunded and understaffed. This kind of scenario is exactly the kind of fuel that is used to encourage distrust in Government. This has to stop.

Social Security can be fixed by simply lifting the current ceiling on wages. Right now, Social Security only taxes about 86% of all income. If you raise this to 90% as it used to be in the 80's, then Social Security is fine. Social Security did NOT cause our deficits.

Medicaid gets the short end of the stick on entitlements. It is bare bones already, and cutting it more with make things worse.

Revenues must go up. I am completely ok with having my taxes rise with the expiration of the Bush Tax cuts. My wife and I earned about $110k last year, so I'm not one of the $250k income people who are used as the floor of the expiration of the Bush Tax Cuts. We all need to chip in more to pay for the things that we demand of our government. The loopholes that the President mentioned during the debt limit talks should also be in play, as well as oil company tax breaks an the ability of hedge fund managers to only be taxed at 15%. A majority of Americans support higher taxes to pay the deficit. Not just Democrats or Republicans, but Americans. Please listen to our citizens.

Perhaps something that the SC can propose would be the elimination of campaign contributions to elected officials. ALL of our problems with pork and tax loopholes and lobbying and corruption are because of money in politics. Money is NOT free speech, and purging money from politics would eliminate all the other problems that we talk about, like Citizen's United, Campaign Finance Reform, etc. We should have public financing of elections, with a cap on how much each campaign can spend. I want you and all of your Congressional colleagues to stop begging for money and do you jobs of running the country.

The current London riots are a preview of what is to come to our shores unless something is done about the gross inequality that we have in this country.

Yes, we do have a long-term budget deficit, but our priority should be on putting our citizens back to work. I implore you to not let the Republican's talking points infect your discussions with the media and your fellow members of Congress. What is good for business is not always good for America; stop calling the rich 'job creators'; we are not in a country that is over taxed and over regulated; we are in a jobs crisis, not a debt crisis; the stimulus did work, but it was too small; knowing what we know now about how bad it was in 2008. The very markets that Republicans are telling us know best are FLOODING money into buying Treasuries irregardless of S&P's downgrade on our debt. It is so cheap for the US to borrow money right now. This proves that markets are not concerned about our deficit, but about the health of the world economy.

With President Obama seemingly incapable of standing up to Republicans (or not wanting to thinking that it hurts his chances of re-election), this means the task falls to you. Don't let us down.

And please keep your talks secret so that we can avoid the posturing that we saw all sides do during the debt ceiling debate.

I know that a lot of this is a wish list of liberal ideas, but the fact that we have this Super Congress for cutting seems to be a fulfillment of a wish of our right-leaning citizens who despise the welfare state, so why not have some liberal ideas in the mix?

Thank you for your Service,

Travis Fischer

Duh!

Ezra Klein has a post worth reading. What is sad about this is that people are JUST NOW realizing this. To assume that Republicans would compromise is...just nuts. It's not that Republicans are crazy, but crazy smart at playing the game. They are like a spoiled brat kid who knows that her parents won't let anything bad happen to her. So she can do whatever she wants and will get bailed out EVERY TIME. Even if she does get in some trouble, mom and dad are right there to help her. There is never a chance at giving her responsibility and letting her deal with the consequences.

Doom

Who says the US is still a great nation? I'm sorry, but this whole 'US needs to be #1 at everything' while turning a blind eye to the wealthy elite who own and control everything around here are deluding themselves. To still be shocked by the Democrats seemingly helplessness over Republicans hostage taking (yet Obama will still rake in a BILLION dollars in campaign contributions, with millions coming from WallStreet) just don't seem to get it. The system is rigged and we are really doomed. It's just a matter of time.

The Tragedy that is the Tea Party

Tea Party people are angry! Tea Party People hate government!

They are mad because their economic hopes from the last 30 years have been shattered. They want to turn to a third party, but the way our system is structured, they can't. So they go with what they think is the lesser of two evils and hope to bring change from within. But they don't understand how government works. They just don't like certain parts of it. So therefore ALL government is bad. Why they turned to Republican's is an odd choice. This party is mostly responsible for the degredation of our society and environment, the greed, the hypocrisy. Bohener wants a deal, but he wants to keep the Speakership more. The Tea Party has been co opted by the very people who are responsible for their anger. It's an impressive coup: Feed the electorate lies about regulation, taxes, trickle-down theory, individualism. When the whole thing crashes down the players responsible are made whole by taxpayers. The players then sweep into the front of the angry mob and lead them against the party that has the best chance to turn things around and fix things. This keeps the irresponsible players in the game while squeezing the last few drops of blood and treasure from the masses until the whole system collapses beyond repair. But by then, the big fish have left the pond and are living it up on yachts in Tahiti while the rest of us are left with the mess and the check. Of course, Obama is complicit in this. Why else would he NOT demand a pound of flesh from the banks in early 2009? Frank Rich's article about how Obama blew it puts the nail on the head. Instead, the Tea Party populism was grabbed by the likes of Sarah Palin and put to use for the very forces that brought about the recession.

Free Markets work, but the pain they cause isn't worth it for some areas. Free Markets work great for cell phones, cereal, and diapers. Not so good in health care, police work, water supply. But diapers and cell phones don't KILL YOU (ok, sometimes they do but not as often as polluted water supplies or rampant crime. Yet, we have rules for cell phones and diapers and cereal. Oh no! BIG GOVERNMENT. I can't think of one item that isn't completely free from some kind of rule. But I don't think that is bad. Why do some people think that?). Free Markets DID exist for our water supply before the EPA and Clean Water Act came into existence. Do you want to see rivers catch fire again from all the chemicals that get poured into them? Free Markets do the cleanup AFTER the fact. After customers DEMAND change in the face of mistakes. Free Markets are a tornado. Sometimes the tornado cleans our all the junk. Sometimes the tornado destroys your whole town. Regulation tries to prevent the tornado from every happening. In a lot of cases this is good. The Tea Party doesn't understand this. It's a balance. You can over regulate. The Tea Party has Bush II thinking: You are either with us, or the Terrorists. It's all black and white. Life isn't like that. Life isn't like TV. But that's a tough pill to swallow. Our culture doesn't like nuance. We've told ourselves for decades that nuance is for sissies. Big government is bad, but the Tea Party seems to be just fine with Big Corporations. It's about balance.

I think that there will be another Tea Party, but this one will be made up of 'liberal' voters who are disgusted with how corporations have take this country over. Call them the white collar 'Coffee Party'. This will come about once the next crash/recession/depression hits and the men behind the curtain are exposed for who they really are. But with how our infrastructure is crumbling, our education system breaking down, our planet becoming more hostile to human habitation, it may be too late to swing the pendulum back towards the center.

Why I might not vote for anyone for president in 2012

It's been a long while since my last post. Lots happening. This debt ceiling debate is really putting things into perspective. It's teaching me that: a) I don't think I will ever vote Republican ever again. b) Obama has got be the worst negotiator ever. David Frum does a great summation of what Obama has done wrong. You can't argue against it. Obama's last few press conferences have been showing his increasing frustration. Too little, too late. If he still thinks the Republicans will be adults he needs to leave office. These people are ASSHOLES, nothing more or less.

Then we get the sanctimonious David Brooks on the News Hour on Friday saying how Obama's 'tone' at the press conference is terrible and unproductive. How nice it must be to be David Brooks. A week and a half after he calls out the Republicans with the same 'tone' that Obama used today he says that Obama is not helping the situation. Please. Republicans are doing this because the KNOW what they are doing is unpopular. But this is their last chance to dismantle the welfare state, and the only way to make it happen is through a President who is a Democrat. If the Republicans lose big but manage to fatally wound SS and Medicare/Medicaid, it's worth it to them. They know how difficult it was to get these programs enacted in the first place. Destroy them now and even if the next Congress tries to reverse things, they will never be like they are today. If Republican's can't have their version of 'America', then no one can have any America.

Republicans are out of their minds. This nonsense that we can pay our interest on the debt, meet Social Security and Medicare payments, pay the troops, and do the other things that we want to do AND then cut wasteful spending without raising the ceiling are simply false. But Obama seems to think that meeting these loonies halfway is a good idea. I don't think so. The man is increasingly naive, and more and more disappointing. The Bush Tax cuts are terrible. They need to go. Sure, my taxes will go up. I want to have a country, so I gotta pay for it. Baby Boomers, you want all this crap, then PAY FOR IT. And let's not forget the real truth here: