Democrats are imploding

The GOP can just buy popcorn, sit back and reeeeeelax.  The Democrats are snatching defeat out of the mouth of victory.

We have Democrats who won’t let the health bill out of committee for a debate.  Not a vote.  A debate.  Joe Lieberman, Mr. GOP in an IND’s clothes is also squelching debate.  And to think he was almost a DEMOCRATIC Vice President. 

WHAT IS WRONG WITH DEBATE??  Yes, if it goes to debate and most people vote on party lines, it will pass, so those opposed definitely want to kill it in committee where it takes a super-majority to open debate (a little ODD if you ask me) but that is the risk with democratically elected representatives.

Also, will the Democrats PUH-LEEEEEEZE stop spending TARP money.  Everyone wants to claim a couple billion here and there to fund projects. 

Before we spend more, let’s see if it is necessary.  In the meantime, reduce our daily interest costs by paying down the deficit.  Do you like paying half a billion a day to service our enormous debt?If my father thought that I ever carried a balance on my credit cards, he would wonder if he raised me right.  (For a year or so in law school, I did.) 

All this does is make it impossible for our President to succeed.  And, if he fails, America fails.  We cannot stand still and survive as a prosperous nation and a superpower. 

(As much as I disagreed with George Bush, I always hoped he was right because he was (at least once) the democratically elected President of the United States.)

GOP tries to link Obama to Nixon

There is a difference between a secret enemies list (Nixon) and calling people out on their lies and inconsistencies (Obama).

Sen. Alexander (GOP TX) knows better than to compare Obama to Nixon.  Obama should strip health care of its anti-trust immunity if it uses its monopoly to the public detriment.  Neutering the US Chamber of Commerce (aka lobbyists) is not a bad idea.   And Obama is being open and transparent about it.

Obama sought bipartisanship and, in return, he has been villified by the right.  And, the GOP pressured Republican Senator Judd Gregg to resign as Obama’s Commerce Secretary almost as soon as he accepted the post.

Surely, Sen. Alexander, you aren’t making this comparison for political gain.  Surely, you spoke out against Bush/Cheney’s enemies list(s) because you are of course only doing the right thing for the right reasons.  Or are you doing the ultra-right thing for the ultra-right reasons?

Will you say anything just to defeat our President?

Mr. President, please let me see you sweat

 

Mr. President, I am sweating.  I am sweating the outcome of the healthcare reform votes.  I am sweating the outcome of financial system reform.  I am sweating the recession.  I am sweating Iranian nuclear proliferation.  I am sweating global warming.  I am sweating more troops in Afghanistan, which just seems to be a quagmire.  In short, everything on the micro-level of my life seems still as precarious as it was when you were elected. 

We elected you in part for your No Drama Obama comportment and you words of empowerment and calm assurance.  But now I want to see you sweat, too, Mr. President, in a take charge way.  Twist some arms to get the reform you promised.  Support the process of stripping health care insurers of the anti-trust immunity if they are bad players. 

LBJ was not Mr. Nice Guy when it came to getting Medicare passed.  And generations of Americans are in his debt.

Mr. President, be principled, be honorable and please be ready to rumble in order to get things done.

Mr. President, Stay away from Fox

Having a battle against Fox News elevates the network to the rank of “worthy adversary”.  Fox News is not a worthy adversary.

And if you use your words and speeches to inspire, then to get into the political ugliness only dilutes YOUR words and YOUR message.

Save your disdain and withering words for the health insurance companies, corporate bigwigs and their outrageous bonuses and those who want to repel limits on carbon emissions.

Stay above the fray, Mr. President, and that includes harnessing Rahm Emanuel. Let others come to your defense.

(P.S.: Here is a good tip: stay on Jon Stewart’s good side.)

Out of the mouths of babes come truths

At a town hall meeting, a fourth grader asked President Obama why everyone hated him.

I think we should stop wondering about the kid who was NOT aloft in a hot air balloon and we should think about what this fourth grader asked the President. It is easier to wonder about hot air balloon boy, his family’s interest in science experiments and their appearance as contestants on “Wife Swap”.  Putting this family under a microscope helps us avoid bigger and, dare I say, more important, issues.

Focusing on the fourth grader’s question requires us to look at how we behave.

We have to examine the tenor of our disagreements, the personal nature of the attacks, our fears for the future of our way of life and our desperate anxiety about not being all powerful on the international stage.

From the simplicity of his question, the following things came to mind:

1. We need to disengage from the-ends-justify-the-means view.  There is another word for “means” and that word is “barbarism” — i.e., torture, character assassination, lies, bribes, etc.

2. Passion for one’s cause not require person attacks, lies and defamationPassion is evident in the force of one’s argument and tireless efforts promoting the cause.

3. There is room for the loyal opposition.  When did we forget the phrase, “my country, right or wrong”?

The goal should be fair and open, vigorous and informative debate, “deciders” act for the common welfare and everyone abides by the result.  If losing means you make up lies and propaganda and continually do things disrespectful of the government, then you don’t deserve to be a citizen.    I was pretty unhappy when GW Bush was declared winner in 2000 and elected in 2004 and every time he did something with which I disagreed, I always hoped that his decisions were right.  Because if he were, the country would suffer.

4.  We must be willing to see the flaws in our own arguments.

I’ll start.  I believe that the public option insurance is necessary, but no one can predict the price tag and it really could be too costly right now.  Maybe in five years, we could afford it.

Also, Afghanistan is a quagmire with a corrupt government.  Nation-building is always a disaster.  I don’t believe that President Obama should send more troops.  In fact, we should remove our troops and seek a relationship with a fairly elected government.  But we should continue to bomb out Al-Qaeda.  (I’m feeling pretty extreme this afternoon.)

Now, let’s look at the GOP who use the slogan, “America First”.  WAIT, do you think Democrats don’t put America first?  Are you delusional?

Let’s look at the facts of the GOP’s putting America first:

  1. Under GOP leadership, manufacturing jobs went overseas in astounding numbers, and promoted the burgeoning economies of India and China.
  2. Refusal to meet with Iran (and GWB’s botching of several opportunities for some sort of freeze) only increased its determination to build nuclear weapons.
  3. The war in Iraq made us indebted to the Chinese government in an insane amount.
  4. Our armies cannot continue another war without a DRAFT.
  5. Our need for fossil fuels has made Russia a necessary player.
  6. De-regulation almost brought this mighty nation to its knees and then the small government politicians had to bailout the banks (SOCIALISM, anyone?)

Now, explain to me again why the GOP blames President Obama for having to forge new diplomatic relationships and alliances?

(Now tell me the truth.  Was I ranting?)

President Obama, I am here, I am queer and I am “over” your speech

You gave a campaign speech.

You re-told the story of the LGBT fight for equality.

Mr. President, how will you add to our collective story line?

I know that you need to get the economy, health care and two wars under control and then, if you still have enough political capital, you can make good on your promises to our community.  That is the way it should be. 

We are Americans, after all, and jobs and economic recovery and health care come first.  

But, please don’t keep promising.  What is the status of the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell?  In your speech, you essentially said that a national hate crimes bill is effectively a done deal.  I sure hope you are right.

By the way, Mr. President, you could have carried off a lavender or rainbow tie.

Who Knew a Nobel Prize Could be so Bad?

Let’s face it.  Barack Obama can’t make another mistake for the rest of his life. 

Not only that, but now he has to do GREAT things and he has to have a HUGE impact on the WHOLE WORLD.  All because 5 people decided to give him the Nobel Peace Prize.

So, in addition to solving our economic crises, ending two wars victoriously, reducing major budget deficits and passing health reform, now he is expected end all starvation, all (other) wars, and the nuclear arms race. 

Gee, great gift, that peace prize.

Does he get a bigger prize if he makes Sarkozy less snarky and Bertolosconi less lascivious?

What if he makes Putin laugh? 

Then, he gets to compete with Tom Delay on Dancing with the Stars.

Health Care Overhaul will reduce Deficit!!!

OBAMA  OBAMA  OBAMA  OBAMA OBAMA

YES WE CAN  YES WE CAN  YES WE CAN

******************************************************************************************

By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent David Espo, Ap Special Correspondent – 38 mins ago

WASHINGTON – Health care legislation drafted by a key Senate committee would expand coverage to 94 percent of all eligible Americans at a 10-year cost of $829 billion, congressional budget experts said Wednesday, a preliminary estimate trumpeted by the White House and likely to power the measure past a major hurdle within days.

The Congressional Budget Office added that the legislation would reduce federal deficits by $81 billion over a decade and probably lead to “continued reductions in federal” red ink in the years beyond.

WHY WE NEED IRAN

McCain thinks time is running out to send troops to Afghanistan?  Is this the same man who thought we could “muddle through” in Afghanistan and the real fight was Iraq?

Our last president sent hundreds of thousands of troops into a quagmire with an ever-changing rationale and an aimless strategy.

There is talk about how well the “surge” worked in Iraq.  Psssssst, Iraq is not Afghanistan.  Afghanistan has humbled would-be conquerors throughout history, the most recent being Russia. The terrain is rugged, the tribal alliances are unsure, the drug trade is king and the government is corrupt.

Before more troops go in, we need to have a defined, winning strategy (and then an exit strategy) against two different groups, the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.  They ARE different groups, but right now are joined in common purpose, to drive out the NATO forces from Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Ironically, one country can help us with a winning strategy in Afghanistan.  And that country is the Islamic Republic of Iran.  Iran helped Bush’s military team early in the war until relations chilled again.  Then Ahmadinejad came to power.

Iran shares NATO’s desire to subdue the Taliban.  The Taliban is Iran’s enemy.  The Taliban ideology and jihadist purpose threaten to undermine the Islamic Republic, and Iran does not want to share a long border with a Taliban-controlled nation again.

So, we need Iran for success in Afghanistan and Iran needs us to be successful in Afghanistan.  Iran is also close to having military nuclear capabilities and the US backs sanctions.  President Obama needs to walk the thinnest of tightropes.

I know Jon Stewart pokes fun at the diplomatic tiptoe-ing around Iran, but whatever choices President Obama makes with Iran or Afghanistan will have consequences far beyond any sound bite or comedy skit.

An Outsider’s Perspective of US (and Us)

Yesterday, I spent almost two hours talking with a friend who is a businessman from the Cayman Islands.  He is in New York on business.  Since his business is somewhat US-dependent, he makes it his business to keep up with the news in the States.  He is a Libertarian and a pragmatist.  I am Democrat and (I like to think) a pragmatist.  We agreed on many things, such as the need to compromise and get incremental reform because it is a matter of conscience that people have affordable access to health care.  And I agreed with him that the public option will not pay for itself and should be phased in later if other measures don’t rein in the insurance companies.  We simply cannot afford to institute this option at this point, given the deficit.

We disagreed on two points.  The points of disagreement fascinate me. 

First, he thought that death panels could be read into the legislation because it was not expressly disclaimed.  My friend is an intelligent, well-read man; he is not Todd Palin.  So I had to think about this more.  Here is what I have deduced:

  • if a person distrusts “government” enough to believe that it would kill its own citizens, well, then you can make that argument. 
  • if a person doesn’t believe that our government would kill its own citizens, you might argue that the panel of experts represented a disguised government take-over of health care. 
  • if a person believes that our government is not trying to kill us and trying to cut down on defensive medicine by setting forth safe harbor protocols, then you think the concern is ill-conceived and politically motivated. 

I guess what I am learning is while I am firmly in the third camp, not all of the concern may be politically motivated.  Sarah Palin must have hit a chord with many, many people who have a deep, abiding distrust of government.  Hey, I was scared of government under Bush/Cheney, so I guess I have to be more open to the fear that this legislation unleashed.  Interestingly, it took my Cayman Islands friend — an outsider —  to help me start to understand the perspective of  blog commenter “Jordana”.  We still disagree, but now I understand that we may not be starting from the same point of trust.  That changes the dynamics of the conversation considerably. 

The other point was related to torture.  Some torture is understandable under some circumstances.  I have never met someone who held that view.  While I can see not prosecuting the CIA, I believe that torture is not understandable under any circumstances.  I don’t want to be tortured and I would probably make stuff up just to make it stop. So, I don’t see how it helps get to the truth.