Radical change we could agree on?

Income Tax is the most ridiculously counter-productive tax we could possibly impose in terms of productivity. We want Americans to be productive. We want them to earn, to create things that others may buy, to create jobs. We do not want them to limit productivity in order to maintain a balance. Americans aren’t about wading in the middle, it’s our tax system that creates people like a friend of mine who always worked 36.5 hours, the minimum average to keep his full-time status, but where he figured that the rest of his check would all go to taxes. He was an accounting major, so I’m sure his math wouldn’t have been too far off, and he always seemed to have more take-home pay and get more back on his returns every year.

A consumption tax would serve the public good, be a better model for a more-free market, and most of all put the balance of incentives back in order. We want people to earn, to save and contribute to the circular flow of money within their communities. We don’t want anyone to shy away from work. If I work my ass off and save enough to buy a house with cash, that’s good for a lot of people. Sure, I may cut out some bank middle-mannery but who wants to argue they deserve to finance those who are inherently more responsible than their own management? If I’m keeping all of my money, I can afford to account for the taxes to buy a nice place in America, where many people enjoy resort-style amenities just for existing in a nice community. If I want to buy five platinum-plated Maseratis, I’ll be prepared to take the hit, but don’t punch me for punching in.

NI4D – The National Initiative for Democracy is the hidden-in-plain-view answer to many of our political woes. Last I checked, there are 11 states using some form of public initiative system. How else would things like medical marijuana get on a ballot? Or ever get a vote of any kind? Or gay marriage bans, for that matter? There are many things that make sense to the general public that are simply too dangerous for any politician to approach, let alone a majority of Congress. Throughout my college days I came across a lot of people who didn’t vote, but were somewhat informed and had an opinion. Even those who vote in Presidential elections rarely vote in off-year and local elections. Voter turnout does not really reflect a complete political apathy, more an apathy with the effectiveness of the current voting system.

Enter the national initiative. If the majority of Americans do not want a war, the majority should be heard. If a majority of residents of a state support a doctor’s right to prescribe medical marijuana, a conservative or pandering legislature should not block the will of the people on a state’s rights issue. If a majority of the public believe that a doctor may refuse to perform certain treatments based on their religious beliefs, I don’t believe any law could Constitutionally coerce them otherwise so long as this is made clear to the patient before their life is in the hands of the doctor. The Bill of Rights mentions the rights of the people in the 9th Amendment, and again as a part of state’s rights. This is better served in those 11 states with initiative systems, and referendum and recall can also be a better way to clear the haze of our current political system. All of the nonsense calls for resignation, all of the political posturing on issues the speaker doesn’t even believe will ever come to a vote and the back-and-forth nature of our failing two-party system would at least see some improvement and at most clear the way for real public discourse, real participatory democracy.

Concerning gay marriage: I say again, can the government simply refuse to define a marriage in any way? Let churches or individuals have the right to define their own “marriages”, and simply allow for all couples seeking to join their lives to be unified in the governments eyes. The slippery slope argument doesn’t fly here. The US has a long precedent of defining such unions as a union of only two, consenting adults. We have laws restricting the marriages of children which are legitimately in the public interest. Lately some ultra-conservative Congressmen have been comparing homosexuality to pedophilia. This is ludicrous and gets a gut reaction in many ways, but I’d offer one rational argument without gut involved. By definition, pedophilia violates legitimate laws in public interest. Sure, there could be homosexual predators out there, but as Chris Hansen proves there are predators of all stupid persuasions. But a union of consenting adults should not be the government’s business to deny one group if it is permitted for another.

If marriage is a religious practice, the sanctity of which should be defended, then it should remain out of the government. What the government should do is have a system for defining next of kin in a humane way, with the utmost priority on individual freedom to choose who is considered a spouse by a hospital.

I’m often accused of being an ultra-liberal or whatever you’d call it, but those tags really are just how others see you based on the conversations you’ve had. Sure, if you’re talking to me about health care, I sound a bit more on the liberal side. But if we’re talking about guns, I’m never really accused of being a conservative. That’s odd considering I don’t think any American should need to choose a “favorite Amendment” from the Bill of Rights. There was a specific reason our founders first defended speech, press and religion then our last line of defense second. This is not a “hunter’s” Amendment, although along with defense, we should be allowed to enjoy sport. It is the first line of the Constitution that says… and if you fail to obey the Kings of America as prescribed by the first three words of the Preamble… we’re not, ya know, gonna take it. The contentious issue here for many liberals is hinged on people like Glenn Beck, who think you start talking about getting guns ready. Paul Revere didn’t ride around practicing his speech. He wasn’t the lead character in ‘The Boy Who Cried Wolf’.

In all honesty, your guns will never be taken away. You’ll be able to feel more confident in that fact if we enact a national initiative system, but at the very least liberal politicians are not a monolith against guns. I was listening to J.Douche Hateworth on the radio the other day and he played a little “comedy” piece that described a terrorist with a knife coming at a family, he said if the father is a liberal he’d quake in his boots and think of pacifism. First of all, a terrorist with a knife? Second of all, his scenario says both fathers have a loaded weapon. You think liberals make bad fathers, Hayworth? Why don’t you come at me with a knife and see how liberal I am?

I’m no gun liberal in terms of ever wishing to take away the guns of any law-abiding citizen. I’m not sure that extreme restrictions on gun possession are the way to get the “more dangerous” criminals. If you look at the example of Al Capone, who was finally brought to justice on racketeering charges. The man ordered countless murders, but we get him for tax evasion? Don’t get me wrong, at the time it was a victory and having a definite criminal in prison is never a bad thing. But how many innocent people do go to jail? How many non-violent offenders serve time for marijuana possession? We can get the little fish, right or wrong, but we have trouble with the big fish? That’s essentially the same logic some liberals use that says driving through a school zone with a legally owned and registered weapon is automatically a crime. It’s pathetic when you consider that most legal gun-owners use their weapons for sport or self-defense. Sure, people stretch the definition of self-defense all the time, but that’s going to happen in society. The answer is more education. More organizations like the NRA who promote gun safety and tradition, and they need to be in the mainstream. The NRA shouldn’t automatically be considered one with the Republican party, although it’s most ardent supporters are often conservative. Gun ownership should be promoted among all law-abiding citizens, because at least one flying spaghetti monster knows that criminals will always have weapons.

“When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” I can’t find the original source of that quote, although in looking I found a great quote from Charlton Heston speaking on Fox News back in 1997: “There’s no such thing as a good gun. There’s no such thing as a bad gun. A gun in the hands of a bad man is a very dangerous thing. A gun in the hands of a good person is no danger to anyone except the bad guys.” What we should do to curb gun violence is create more good guys, through lifelong education and a societal emphasis on family of some kind. I know adopted kids who are great successes and legacies who have fizzled out, and it all came down to involvement. If people are involved in the lives of children they will learn to act as responsible people do, if children are raised with every amenity money can buy with no relationship with parents or some caregiver they will look for a role model somewhere. Think of the ratio of crap-to-awesome at any given mall. I’d argue that you’re taking the same gamble by allowing your child to pick any role model from their lives in your absence. Sure, they could end up with an amazing role model somewhere but it’s a gamble parents don’t have to take. Well, they shouldn’t have to take.

This is where I can get more liberal on people, but I simply can’t believe you can support both family and bite-sized government. Health care is a part of this. Healthy parents can work without getting sick as often, imposing less of a burden on the family’s budget and productivity. Children’s health care helps give all Americans a chance to grow up and contribute to society rather than being punished by the circumstances of their birth. I do not advocate wreckless takeover of health care by the government, but a quick read of the Preamble would establish that the federal government has some responsibility to our health at least in terms of keeping us productive and safe from potential pandemic. The more free we are to be productive and contribute to society, the more we all benefit. We will all have different ideas about how to get us there, but I think we’d all agree on the benefits of a healthy society.

These are just some ramblings. I just wonder if we all agreed on the results we wanted, the discourse on the methods might be more civil.

Three things everyone can do to make the economy stronger

I go AWOL every now and again, but certain things pull me out of hibernation. This week’s shenanigans on the Hill have been tacky melodrama at best. There are so very few politicians who know anything about economics, but many know something about theatre. 

If I wanted to hear something completely familiar delivered by a bad actor, I’d have watched a Tom Cruise film. Here are three things we can all do to make the economy stronger. These aren’t things we can all read which will simply make the economy stronger, but things anyone and everyone can do.

1. Mind your wallet. Ask anyone you know if they’re in debt. When everyone has a little debt, it amounts to a lot of debt. Debt, at a certain point, creates friction in our economy. Get out of debt, start spending your money again and you’ll already be helping.
2. Attempt to understand the economy. Look up terms you are fuzzy about. Get as realistic a vision of a ‘better economy’ that you can. It won’t happen overnight, but it also won’t happen with our heads buried in the sand.
3. Understand that the economy is not partisan. The economy doesn’t care if you call yourself a Democrat or a Republican. The economy is not waiting for anything. It won’t suddenly ‘do something’. It is simply a machine to circulate money, and it needs lube.

This week’s fixations

I’ve been getting caught up in thought more often this week than any point in recent memory. Usually when this happens I’m left with useless revelations about insignificant observations. It’s probably the same this time.

Quantum theory really only clouds our definitions of the words ‘and’ and ‘or’, which blows my mind. Every combination of two or more things is a false assumption, an impossibility. There is only one thing.

Deepak Chopra said “When you point at the moon, I look at the moon. I don’t worship the finger” on CNN at some point this week and it’s my new favorite lens through which to view religion. I find absolutely nothing wrong with looking at the moon, I simply cannot worship a finger.

I was talking with my brother-in-law this week about tact. There are essentially two definitions of tact, he gave one and I gave the other. The interesting thing, to me, about all of this is how much the two interpretations/definitions reveal about our own perspectives.

1. a keen sense of what to say or do to avoid giving offense; skill in dealing with difficult or delicate situations.
2. a keen sense of what is appropriate, tasteful, or aesthetically pleasing; taste; discrimination.

The way it looks to me, definition one is concerned with the impression given and definition two is concerned more with doing the “right thing”. Good-doer or politician?

On a lighter note, I’d almost forgotten some of the most disgustingly awesome things I’d seen over the course of my lifetime. Too bad an NBA career doesn’t require only 4 minutes, then injuries wouldn’t be such an issue.

A new trajectory

Since the election is over, this blog will probably turn to focus on other interests of mine. I still love talking politics and the economy, but I’d like to write more about sports, science, music and possibly chronicle my home-brewing season this year. If you would like to see anything else here, just post a comment or send an email to the address listed on my about me page.

Marriage is gay

Prop 8 in California and Prop 102 in Arizona have been the buzz around the water cooler and the subject of daily protests in the street since last Tuesday. Gays are trying to get married, folks. It will ruin civilized society. Much like miscegenation did in 1967.

This is the one issue in national and state politics where I wonder just why I haven’t heard my argument before. Maybe it’s out there, but generally this debate is like two trains passing in the night. Here’s my question: why is the government involved in marriage at all?

There’s absolutely no need for the government — on any level — to recognize or fail to recognize any couple’s love for one another. None. The government is not in the love business, and clearly the “threat” of gay marriage does not hinder anyone’s ability to love another human being. All marriages should be seen as a civil union by the government, and churches can recognize the bonding of souls (or 55-hour Britney Spears marriage extravaganza) in whatever way they deem appropriate.

Civil unions should be defined as a bonding of social interests, not any sort of relationship between only a man and a woman. For those with the slippery slope argument handy, I’ll point out that every one of these arguments was made about miscegenation (marriage between races) back in the 1960s. Every last one of them. Care to point out one such example of miscegenation actually “mongrolizing the races” as people said at the time?

Now, before I get hit with arguments from the opposite side that “separate, but equal” is never equal, note that I don’t think the government should recognize anything as a marriage. It’s merely — in their eyes — a union of civil interests between two people. I think the reason this argument isn’t presented is that it combines the points of conflict and would created a knee-jerk reaction from both sides. But then again, sometimes we react that way when trying to do the right thing.

A suspicion about the electoral map in 2008

This is what I imagine could be possible in the very real world if all voters who have shown interest throughout the entire campaign — on both sides — shows up on Election Day (or voted early). If the race were to end up being close, with McCain winning the traditionally red states of North Dakota, Louisiana, Montana, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia & Arizona, holds Nebraska’s 2nd district and then locks down Florida, Pennsylvania & Ohio – the Republican will win the White House for a 3rd straight term 270-268. But if you have any doubts about any of those states, Obama should be the next President of the United States of America. President Barack Obama. I, for one, have doubts in all of those states. My doubts come from polls and first-hand accounts of the mood in many “red state” lines I’ve read in various blogs on the new 4th Estate. 

I’m not claiming to be an expert on anything nor am I really making a prediction per se, it’s more like what my gut would bet the farm on if I had like $3 left after losing my life savings, home and car in Vegas. I tend to look to fivethirtyeight.com, pollster.com and early voting statistics from the George Mason University Department of Public and International Affairs. Call me crazy, but I think the election can only be won for McCain with a LOT of voter suppression on Tuesday. Go to 270towin.com, make your own map and if you care link to it here. I’m curious to see where others think this race could go.

$150k for clothes? John McCain thinks it erodes public confidence

This ‘maverick’ tag must just be slang for a Republican flip-flop. How else would McCain’s supporters, particularly those excited by the pick of Sarah Palin for VP nominee, justify their admiration for a man who gained his reputation as a maverick by trying to move his own party out of a state of ignorance? McCain supported the so-called amnesty bill, for which he was called a maverick. For this he was also hated by the same people holding signs boasting the label.

Senator McCain was first opposed to the Bush tax cuts, saying it unfairly benefited the wealthy. Apparently somewhere along the way Cindy tapped him on the shoulder and showed him her $4.2 million tax return because he’s now in favor of making those same tax cuts permanent. From his own tax cuts, his family would receive over $730,000 which still makes me wonder how that will somehow trickle down. Maybe there is a legitimate explanation, I’d just like to hear it.

His most recent maverick escapade was picked up by ThinkProgress. The news broke this week that more than $150,000 was spent on Sarah Palin’s wardrobe in her 2 months as GOP VP nominee. Granted, this is not a huge deal. It’s not near as startling as Senator McCain’s recent “agreement” with Jack Murtha, who basically said people in Western Pennsylvania are racist. But something like this does reveal another opportunity to call McCain a maverick. After all, he used to believe that campaign funds being spent on personal clothing eroded the public confidence.

MCCAIN: Madam President, the amendment before the Senate is a very simple one. It restricts the use of campaign funds for inherently personal purposes. The amendment would restrict individuals from using campaign funds for such things as home mortgage payments, clothing purchases … and vacations or other trips that are noncampaign in nature. […]

The use of campaign funds for items which most Americans would consider to be strictly personal reasons, in my view, erodes public confidence and erodes it significantly.

McCain supporters for the Constitution

It’s truly great to see some of the subtle stances of the McCain campaign and individual supporters as of late. It has really been too little, too late considering McCain and Palin have been the ones stoking the fires of racism and intolerance. Here some McCain supporters surround another group who are distributing ignorant, un-American bumper stickers. The Muslim supporters of McCain are right to be offended, but that’s what happens when you turn the election into a “Who’s more American” contest.

Of course, the McCain campaign has silenced this true patriot because he’s Muslim. It’s funny how we teach our kids how we grew painfully out of slavery and went through the civil rights movement and are all better for it, then the next wave of “other” comes around and we resist the opportunity to make the same progress.

The inherent injustice of trickle-down economics

This point is simple. Trickle-down economics is the idea that lower taxes for the wealthy and for corporations will lead to jobs being created. So let me get this straight, we let the wealthy have more money in hopes that they’ll let the poor work for it? You mean to tell me the people who complain about “lazy welfare recipients” want us to give them money, so we can work for it? That’s ludicrous.

If everyone has purchasing power in this country, demand will dictate that jobs be created. If everyone were better off, the corporations would be better off in the sense that their customer bases would only continue to grow. When the economy tanks, even the corporations suffer, but they are some how immune to creative destruction (fossil fuels, bullet trains) or risk (banks, united airlines, chrysler). This nation is strong on the backs of the 300 million, not on the pocketbooks of the wealthy few.

McCain campaign lobbyist Ed Rogers’ transparent spin

On Hardball with Chris Matthews today, right-wing spinster Ed Rogers made baseless claim after baseless claim while exonerating the McCain campaign for stoking the fires of racism and antipathy toward any opposing viewpoint. Not only is this extremely dangerous, but it completely goes against the free exchange of ideas upon which America’s strength is built. What woke me from my half-napping state was his first ludicrous claim, that “Obama has never done a hard thing in his life!” This got me to thinking, what has Ed Rogers’ life been like?

Well, his lobbying firm Barbour, Griffith and Rogers represents the Republic of China. He’s tied to a private contractor whose profits and purpose exist only because of the Iraq War and the greed cesspool it has created within the already perverse military-industrial complex. This contractor, Diligence, LLC’s chairman Richard Burt had this to say about the current business climate in the Middle East: “The opportunity for business growth in the Middle East has never been better.” Rogers has also served as a deputy assistant to President George H. W. Bush, of “it’s the economy, stupid” fame.

I’m not going to go through all of the examples of Senator Obama overcoming adversity to get to where he is today, but a white bread warmonger and advisor to another president is found wanting on credibility with this attack. He went on to flop around like a fish out of water on the “hate rally” nature of this weeks McCain-Palin rallies. I will say now that if anything should happen to Senator Obama, the McCain campaign will certainly be partly culpable. With cringe reactions to shouts of “terrorist!” and “traitor!” evident on McCain’s face, he has no excuse for not standing up for civilized society, and absolutely no integrity left in his hate-filled campaign.

Rogers claimed that the hate and anger are “distractions” and that “people should behave”, as if threatening to “kill him!” or saying “off with his head” are simply Klansmen rally attendees misbehaving. They are threatening a legitimate candidate for the highest office in this land in a public forum and the McCain campaign doesn’t even have the class to respond as a leader of a free society. All the while Rogers continues to say that Bill Ayers and Reverend Wright are fair game. These are the “associations” which are stoking the hate-crowd fire. The truth is, these are not real associations that bear any significance on this election, but since the 5-week-old national politician Sarah Palin says we must have an explanation for the, I’ll simply repeat everything Obama has said in public about the relationships.

When Barack Obama was 8 years old, a radical anti-war activist was a member of a group that planted bombs at the Pentagon and the US Capital. These caused property damage but no deaths. Today, 40 years later, that reformed “domestic terrorist” is a professor of education at the University of Illinois. He is a contributing member of society whose cause is to improve the state of the education system in that state. His life has been far from perfect, but also far from the life of Obama. In fact, their paths crossed as members of a charitable board working in education, the Annenberg Foundation. The media has rightly pointed out that this foundation is comprised of conservatives and liberals and was founded by a former Ambassador in the Reagan administration. He did not meet this former radical under any radical circumstances.

Obama also did not know everything about this man’s past before meeting him. On the campaign trail, Governor Palin recently stated that she’s known about Ayers “since forever”, even way up there in Alaska as she likes to say. Palin should stop patronizing people, she’s not familiar with the Bush Doctrine, which is responsible for the mission her son is now carrying out in a country that had NOTHING to do with the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001. She certainly didn’t learn better than the rest of the American people, whom she claims “must be exposed to Obama’s radical associations” about an obscure anti-war group during the Vietnam War. Sarah Palin told a good lie, because there’s no way of proving this, unless her high school history teachers and college professors care to share her “intellectual curiosities”.

I’ve already written about Reverend Wright at length, and will just sum him up by giving one piece of advice. Watch the entire 18 minutes worth of sermons where the “un-American” 30-second sound clips were taken from. If you have any understanding of free speech in this country, you’ll realize there’s nothing un-American about speaking your mind — including criticizing the actions and policies of this government (which should be of the people, by the people and for the people).

I’ll also say that Pastor Thomas Muthee is much more extreme and un-American in a sense of respecting the 1st Amendment and both the establishment clause and the free exercise clause. It is clear, Muthee wants to “infiltrate” our political and economic systems with his 17th Century Salem-style beliefs. If you take Wright in context, he isn’t nearly as abrasive. If you take Muthee in context, he’s even more extreme than any short clip could portray.

So as the McCain-Palin campaign stokes the fires of hatred and violence, they should recognize that they will be individually responsible should any of their extremist followers “misbehave” as Ed Rogers says. Here’s an idea, if you must have distractions like Ayers and Wright take time from discussing the economic crisis, how about doing it only to Senator Obama’s face at the debate. Don’t tell your Klan-inspired crowds about Obama’s association with a college professor that it was an association with a “domestic terrorist”, unless you have pictures of an 8-year old Obama with Weather Underground member William Ayers. Unless, of course, you think the FBI should be notified about Obama’s — and the University of Illinois’ — terrorist connections.

Concerning connections that may be worth a quick look-see by the FBI, perhaps they should start with a secessionist group led by people who reject the title of “American” and host a website with the tagline “Alaska First – Alaska Always”. A group with the “First Dude” of Alaska formerly on it’s membership list. A group Governor Palin addressed as recently as March of this year, telling them to “Keep up the good work!” I don’t know about you, but I don’t believe my state is above my country. I’m certainly not standing behind a sign that says “Country First” with ties and supporters like this. I think it’s time Sarah Palin answered for her own radical ties, and the McCain campaign stop lying to the American people about Senator Obama.

I want to note that McCain faced boos and harsh backlash today for his defense of Senator Obama as a “decent man”, which is exactly what McCain should have said but it is a bit late. This video also shows that, clearly Senator McCain and Governor Palin must do more.

McCain campaign offices as empty as the rhetoric

You could take every McCain volunteer we’ve seen doing actual work in the entire trip, over six states, and it would add up to the same as Obama’s single Thornton, CO office. Or his single Durango, CO office. These ground campaigns bear no relationship to each other.

Sean Quinn from FiveThirtyEight.com has an interesting story about his experiences with both campaigns. It seems the McCain campaign is more about hating on Obama than actually running phone banks and canvassing neighborhoods. Perhaps this is why the trail has turned disgusting and downright reprehensible this week.

When someone at a McCain rally responded to “Who is the real Barack Obama?” with “a terrorist!”, Senator McCain clearly heard the remark, as evidenced by his cringing after hearing the remark. What Senator McCain did not do was stand up for decency, and honor his campaign pledge to run a clean campaign. That promise was broken long ago, if it was ever even true.

If the McCain campaign and his Klan rally supporters want to know who “the real Barack Obama” is, they need only a Google search. Even for those who don’t own a computer, any public library would be glad to let you cure your own ignorance by actually gathering some information, rather than perpetuating lies. Sarah Palin continues to say “we don’t know much about Obama”, after only hitting the national stage in the last days of August. Take a press conference, tell the media we don’t know much about Obama. Don’t simply keep inciting hate speech.

Burton Malkiel wrote of the “castles in the air” theory of investment in A Random Walk Down Wall Street. The McCain campaign has co-opted the concept, constantly upping the rhetoric to a level so inflated that the foundation disappears. At this point, McCain and Palin seem to just be holding Klan rallies in the air.

Cindy McCain, your husband was right about you

Today, Cindy McCain attacked Barack Obama for voting against funding for the troops. She did this in the most classless way by omitting the fact that her own husband made the same vote two months later. Then she dares Obama to spend a day in her shoes. Are you kidding me?

“The day that Sen. Obama cast a vote to not to fund my son when he was serving sent a cold chill through my body let me tell you,” Cindy McCain said in introducing the GOP ticket. “I would suggest Sen. Obama change shoes with me for just one day. I suggest he take a day and go watch our men and women deploying.” HuffPo

Cindy, anyone in this country (with very few exceptions) would gladly switch places with you, if only for a day. Why? Because we all used to call ourselves middle-class, and now we wonder if we’re just poor. Furthermore, simply watching soldiers deploy means nothing. Maybe try not sending those men and women into an unjust and unneccessary war? Or maybe just try not to lie about your own husband’s record? 

Your reckless, lying husband helped Charles Keating destroy the lives and life savings of thousands of American families. How did you feel about that? Or how about his first wife, or does adultery not matter to a beer heiress? Your husband and the cronies in his campaign are partly responsible for the national economic crisis we face today. And by we, I mean everyone but you. Of course, what could we expect from someone who steals drugs from a charity?

How will McCain’s tax cuts trickle down?

If I could ask Senator McCain one question this morning, it would be about his tax cuts. Specifically, I would want to know how he justifies who is getting the tax cuts under his own plan. As ThinkProgress noted during the debate last night, McCain’s own family would receive over $300,000 in tax cuts under his own plan. I constantly hear Republicans with little understanding of the market talking about job creation as a weak link to tax cuts. This is my inquiry:

What would you do with that $300,000 tax cut in your own personal finances that would create jobs and/or trickle down and what path might that money take on its way to ultimately helping the middle class, which seems to be in constant decline in this millennia?

I’d be curious to know if Senator McCain would say he is the prime candidate for tax cuts in America. There’s something disgustingly 18th Century about the world’s strongest model democracy favoring an aristocracy in its tax codes. Until people start to explain where the money will go, up to and including a cameo appearance in middle class family budgets, there’s absolutely no reason to continue with failed “trickle down” economic policies.

The four things America needs most

Election Day should be a national holiday. There is absolutely no reason why people should be receiving days off to celebrate the lives of people they know nothing about — or don’t believe in — when a very public and founding principle is not equally respected. An active citizenry is vital to any democracy, and celebrating the life of a raping, pillaging, culture-eradicating scumbag certainly seems archaic.

Impose a two or three-term limit on ALL public offices. Career politicians are the backbone of our corrupt system that borders on aristocracy. When politicians are simply doing a job, they will ultimately find the loopholes in their own system. Politicians campaign on ideals and a vision for the country, only to enter office and scratch the backs of those who scratched theirs. This all happens at the expense of progress, the American people and — in a very real sense — the American dream.

Eliminate the winner-take-all system in the electoral college for 48 states (Maine and Nebraska already distribute electors by district). Federalism relies on local and state level representation being strong and representative of that population, rather than simply taking cues to homogenize from the Federal government. There’s no reason anyone should ever feel their vote won’t matter simply because they live in a ‘red state’ or ‘blue state’.

The William U’Ren system of initiative, referendum and recall at a national level, and in all states would enhance the actual representation of average Americans in government. I am fortunate to live in a state where the people can propose ballot initiatives, referendums and initiate recalls of officials who betray the public trust. It works great for this state, helps us hold up our end of the federalism bargain and should certainly be made national. With a national initiative, we could have proposed our own bailout package, rather than relying on corrupt career politicians to actually speak for our interests.

Why doesn’t Sarah Palin have to pay taxes?

I’ve been reading a lot of tax attorneys’ analyses of Sarah Palin’s tax returns, as I have with the other candidates. This is the first time I’ve felt compelled to post anything, mostly because I still wonder how this is even possible. Tax evasion is serious business, or so I have been led to believe. Apparently it’s all copacetic when you are a former beauty queen running for Vice President. When a billion scenarios would lead to this woman becoming the leader of the free world, somehow she can still get away with not paying taxes?

The issue of her per diem payments for staying at home is now under review by the Alaskan government. It’s nice to see she’s not completely immune to the same justice system as the rest of us.

McCain and Palin open the door to their own terrorist sympathies

John McCain was partly responsible for the last national financial crisis.  I’ve already linked a photo of McCain with Keating, and now the Obama campaign has created a video to expose the economic “principles” of John Sidney McCain III.

The 400 wealthiest Americans have increased their net worth by $670 billion over the last 8 years, according to Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. This is staggering. When you hear Sarah Palin’s new buzz phrase, redistribution of wealth, this is what they are trying to hide. The redistribution has already begun. It’s the few taking from the many. As they try to smear Obama as a socialist, they are selling fascism.

Publicly subsidized, privately profitable! -Propagandhi

• Our economy has lost jobs for 9 straight months.
• Last week, the Dow dropped 777 points in a single day. That is $1.2 trillion being pulled from the market at once.
• This week, nothing has changed in the markets.

Bill Ayers is an interesting name to be thrown around. I think it makes a great comparison to names like Thomas Muthee, or the Alaskan Independence Party. If there were an episode of VH1’s ‘Where Are They Now?’, then the entire argument of Bill Ayers is quickly engulfed in the wave of shock that comes from understanding where Muthee, the AIP and the Palin family stand now.

• Ayers, who committed his crimes in the 1960s is now a professor in the College of Education at the University of Illinois in Chicago. Senator Obama was 8 years old when Ayers was a member of the Weather Underground, and Obama has denounced Ayers’ actions.
• Palin, on the other hand, has given a speech to the Alaskan Independence Party as recently as 2008 and her husband was a card-carrying member of the secessionist group. Their website boasts the motto: Alaska First – Alaska Always. AIP founder Joe Vogler says “I’m an Alaskan, not an American. I have no use for America or her damned institutions.” He’s also stated “the fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred of the US government. And I won’t be buried under their damn flag….when Alaska is an independent nation they can bring my bones home.” That is the founder of the group Palin addressed this year.
• Pastor Muthee, who has blessed Sarah Palin’s campaign began as a witch hunter in Kenya. She’s also gushed about how he prayed for God to “make a way” for her campaign. He prayed for God to bring finances to the campaign, in front of a congregation. How does that qualify for a tax exemption?

While we’re discussing radicals, how about those who bomb abortion clinics? Clearly this is one terrorist group that has Senator McCain’s sympathies.

John McCain is as mentally fit as Grandpa Simpson and Sarah Palin is as intellectually curious as George W. Bush — at best. All of these ridiculous spurious links brought up by the Palin-McCain campaign are to distract us from some of the worst economy ever seen by “Joe Six-Pack” as Palin likes to describe us.

Are you better off today than you were 8 years ago?

Mr. McCain goes to Washington

He was so gracious as to show his face in Washington, despite having only voted on one issue in the last six months to settle the issue that most said was on track to be worked out overnight. Yesterday, Senator McCain announced his campaign would be suspended today. Today, his campaign is active as any other day on the campaign trail.

He said he would not debate if there was not a deal worked out, despite the fact that he isn’t on any relevant committee to do any of the “working out”. This really leads most people to wonder if this isn’t just a response to his tanking poll numbers. It also omits the major point about his effectiveness with “reform” when it is actually necessary, that he has not sponsored a single banking bill in the 111th Congress.

After arriving in DC this morning Senator McCain met with House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio to communicate how important it is that a deal be reached. Or did he? When we heard from Rep. Boehner after the meeting, he said that no such deal had been reached. This either leads us to believe John McCain is not capable of convincing his own party to compromise, or that he is secretly trying to prolong this issue through the weekend to interfere with the debate schedule.

Many in the media have pointed out the tight schedule and the possibility of simply cancelling one of the debates. The Vice-Presidenial debate would be the first to go if the McCain campaign had their way. Sarah Palin can’t handle Charlie Gibson or Katie Couric, so a debate seems like such a stretch.

This looks like the same political grandstanding surrounding the controversial immigration bill last year. After failing to show his face in Washington for 55 days, he went ahead and brought his media circus in for the vote. Immigration is also one of those areas where Senator McCain will claim to have bucked his own party. What he (and his campaign) will fail to point out is that he got promptly put back in his place by the Republican party on the issue. Simply looking at who John McCain would be beholden to for winning the election should make any rational person shudder.

As an added not, here are some video highlights (lowlights) of Gov. Palin’s recent interview with Katie Couric. I can hardly comment on these things, only to say that this level of incompetence and lack of awareness of the world makes President Bush look like a scholar. This isn’t the VP you could have a beer with, it’s the kind of VP you could bring on a witch hunt.

Naked shorts, and other perverse translations

I’ve had a few friends express their inability to understand the current economic crisis and thought a post was probably due. There are a few things I’d say to set the stage. The situation is intentionally complicated and hard for the layman to understand. People like Senator Phil Gramm, lobbyists Rick Davis and Steve Schmidt, Charles Keating and cohort have, over time, chipped away at the protections for investors and borrowers in favor of lenders and brokers. 

Now for two definitions — for people from my neck of the woods — to better understand this Wall Street/Washington doublespeak. Naked shorts — the practice of selling a stock short without first borrowing the shares or ensuring that the shares can be borrowed as is done in a conventional short sale (Wikipedia) — or selling someone else’s stuff. What might happen if you sold your neighbor’s car and had them pick it up from the neighbor? Should you be bailed out?

Sub-prime lending is basically risky lending. They call it sub-prime when banks do this. Before banks got into loansharking, lenders would wreck their kneecaps — not the economy — if borrowers were unable to pay up. I’m not saying people shouldn’t be allowed to buy a home, I’m just saying I shouldn’t be getting offers to buy a home. People in my financial situation shouldn’t need to (at best) throw millions of pounds of paperwork away each year or (at worst) open the ‘loanshark on bank letterhead’ offer to buy a home with no proof of creditworthiness.

The Secretary of the Treasury is the principal economic advisor to the President and plays a critical role in policy-making by bringing an economic and government financial policy perspective to issues facing the government. The Secretary is responsible for formulating and recommending domestic and international financial, economic, and tax policy, participating in the formulation of broad fiscal policies that have general significance for the economy, and managing the public debt. The Secretary oversees the activities of the Department in carrying out its major law enforcement responsibilities; in serving as the financial agent for the United States Government; and in manufacturing coins and currency. US Department of the Treasury

We’ve got Henry Paulson. If you watched his testimony this morning, you saw a mirror image of President Bush. He wants all $700 billion now, with oversight to be determined later. He estimates they will spend approximately $50 billion per month, and he has already stated he’ll not stay in office after President Bush leaves in January. Senator Chuck Schumer from New York asked the ultimate question from a taxpayer’s perspective today, asking if the Treasury could deal with an authorization of $150 billion now with a review in January. The response, no, Paulson needs all of it now. I don’t think anyone in their right mind would be able to ignore the fact that the person asking for complete and total control over $700 billion of taxpayer money plans to quit in the next four months.

Since July 10, 2006 Henry Paulson has had the opportunity to take measures to prevent this situation. He has offered no warning and done nothing. Now he wants a blank check to try “various market-based approaches” to fix his own mess. As the ‘principal economic advisor to the President’ it’s clear that failure in this administration touches all aspects of the government. (See Alberto Gonzales, Michael Chertoff, Michael Brown, Donald Rumsfeld)

Paulson also oversees the “major law enforcement responsibilities”, and therefore was the ‘Sheriff’ when Wall Street got out of control. He let the party get out of control, we cannot give him more money than he expects to lose. Here’s a question for parents: when your child throws a party while you’re away, do you double the money you leave him next time you’re out of town?

Let’s rewind this situation a bit, to the past year when Americans constantly questioned Washington about a solution to the crisis so they could avoid losing their homes. Washington ignored these calls, and the President went into recluse mode. The Hurricane season has shown us just how much President Bush has learned about the office he holds and the responsibilities it bears. He’s learned that he must make more effort to appear to care, or his party will suffer. He has not learned how to truly look out for the interests ofall Americans, not just his millionaire friends.

Today, Senator Obama spoke in Florida about four key points of the rescue effort. Although he was certainly reading notes, he no doubt sought guidance on these issues and is probably better to get everything right than to attempt to turn economics into prose. The four points, however, were clear and sounded like exactly what Americans (as a lending institution) need in order to hand over that much of the taxpayers’ money. (looking for the full video)

John McCain and Charles Keating

Remember this really damning picture of McCain celebrating his birthday with Charles Keating, the villain of the last big taxpayer bailout of unrestrained Republican greed? Here’s the article where bmaz got that photo (pdf from The Phoenix Sun Gazette, September 12, 1993).

Everyone should see this picture and know this story. It should be a cautionary tale. Obama needs to point this out and the media needs to get the message across to the American people that the last time we had a crisis even close to this it was at the hands of Charles Keating and the “Keating Five” — including John McCain. His current posse is no better, and his recent buffoonery only validates that he has no real idea what he’s doing with the economy.

read more | digg story

Hey Sarah Palin, I dare you to say that on Chicago’s Southside

“John McCain is the only one who has truly fought for you.”  She loves this line.  She loves saying he doesn’t say it himself — although Lord knows he’s got it as an excuse if you ask how many houses he owns.  But I certainly doubt she’d even consider saying it in Chicago.  I’d love to see that reaction, unless the McCain campaign cherry picked the crowd — something they are notorious for doing.

The truth is, there are all kinds of ways to fight for people.  Like fighting for Charles Keating.  Fighting for Sean Parnell.  Or maybe it’s fighting for average people who have been hit hard by Republican tax cuts for the companies that sent their jobs overseas.  John McCain certainly fought for us, as did Senator Obama.  To think someone putting off Law School to help people restore jobs to a community can be scoffed at makes me wonder if anyone in the Religious Right actually paid attention to the words of Jesus, every indicator tells me they stopped after reading the Old Testament.