Been doing this blog for a week now and I need a vacation.
I’m driving out West to spend some time with my Pop who is celebrating his 90th Birthday. It’s amazing how smart he is getting as time goes by, and he’s in good health. I can’t keep him out of the casino’s but he goes to confession every week, so it all evens out.
There’s a lot of Conservative Talk Radio between here and California. In some states I can hardly get even that. I have to listen to fire, brimstone and alleluia for hundreds of miles.
In the past I have gotten the same Bill O’Reily show three different times of day. What a treat. Arguing out-loud keeps me alert on those long straight interstates. I can turn the radio down and shout over him just like he does to his guests.
While in Orange County I get in to some great lectures and discussion groups. For the most conservative county in California, there are a lot of progressive and liberal thinkers. In a couple of weeks for example we will listen to John Dean, of Watergate infamy, talk about his new book. Another regular is Robert Sheer, former LA times reporter, patriot, Bush hater, and Editor of truthdig: http://www.truthdig.com/about/
So, I’m gone now. I hope all three of you who read this have health and happiness in the coming year. Be back in touch in about a week. Look for my reports on what's up in the blue states.
Alleluia Y'all
Monday, December 31, 2007
WHO ARE THE REAL WELFARE QUEENS
WELFARE QUEENS
Overheard outside the racquetball court: “I think they should do away with ALL WELFARE. I’m sick of supporting the lazy bastards who are not willing to work for a living.”
Two notes to add perspective:
#1. One guy was retired and collecting $650 per month Social Security for each of his two toddlers. The other was a retired State employee collecting a generous pension.
#2. I just heard an AM Radio talk show host say exactly the same words driving into town.]
These guys are still conjuring up images of the “Welfare Queen”, an obese pregnant woman in flip-flops and hair curlers with six kids double-parking her brand new Cadillac in front of the Welfare Office. I don’t remember when the Right first promoted that as the typical welfare recipient, but it worked then and it works now for radio wing-nuts like Savage and Galligar.
A big mistake the Limbough dittoheads and FOX NEWS zombies make is accepting anecdotal information as evidence of a trend. If you see an “obese pregnant woman in flip-flops and hair curlers with six kids double-parking her brand new Cadillac” in front of the welfare office, it doesn’t mean all welfare recipients are “obese pregnant woman in flip-flops and hair curlers with six kids double-parking her brand new Cadillac”. In fact, many women collecting welfare are escaping abusive relationships and are off the rolls and independent within two years.
If you believe this chart (from the Library of Congress) you’ll see that people making under $10,000 a year family income are collecting less than 18% of the entitlements budget. Entitlements seem to be evenly distributed across socio-economic classes. Hmmmm! Do you think the retired insurance salesman will volunteer to give up his kid’s $1300 Social Security Checks to stop all entitlement programs?
----------------------------------------------------Percent of -----------------------Percent of
Income ---------------------------------------------all households -------------- all benefits
-----------------------------------------------
Under $10,000 ---------------------------------------16.4% --------------------------17.8%
$10,000 - $20,000 --------------------------------18.8 ---------------------------- 21.7
$20,000 - $30,000 ----------------------------------17.0 ----------------------------17.2
$30,000 - $50,000 ---------------------------------- 23.6 ----------------------------21.8
Overheard outside the racquetball court: “I think they should do away with ALL WELFARE. I’m sick of supporting the lazy bastards who are not willing to work for a living.”
Two notes to add perspective:
#1. One guy was retired and collecting $650 per month Social Security for each of his two toddlers. The other was a retired State employee collecting a generous pension.
#2. I just heard an AM Radio talk show host say exactly the same words driving into town.]
These guys are still conjuring up images of the “Welfare Queen”, an obese pregnant woman in flip-flops and hair curlers with six kids double-parking her brand new Cadillac in front of the Welfare Office. I don’t remember when the Right first promoted that as the typical welfare recipient, but it worked then and it works now for radio wing-nuts like Savage and Galligar.
A big mistake the Limbough dittoheads and FOX NEWS zombies make is accepting anecdotal information as evidence of a trend. If you see an “obese pregnant woman in flip-flops and hair curlers with six kids double-parking her brand new Cadillac” in front of the welfare office, it doesn’t mean all welfare recipients are “obese pregnant woman in flip-flops and hair curlers with six kids double-parking her brand new Cadillac”. In fact, many women collecting welfare are escaping abusive relationships and are off the rolls and independent within two years.
If you believe this chart (from the Library of Congress) you’ll see that people making under $10,000 a year family income are collecting less than 18% of the entitlements budget. Entitlements seem to be evenly distributed across socio-economic classes. Hmmmm! Do you think the retired insurance salesman will volunteer to give up his kid’s $1300 Social Security Checks to stop all entitlement programs?
----------------------------------------------------Percent of -----------------------Percent of
Income ---------------------------------------------all households -------------- all benefits
-----------------------------------------------
Under $10,000 ---------------------------------------16.4% --------------------------17.8%
$10,000 - $20,000 --------------------------------18.8 ---------------------------- 21.7
$20,000 - $30,000 ----------------------------------17.0 ----------------------------17.2
$30,000 - $50,000 ---------------------------------- 23.6 ----------------------------21.8
$50,000 - $100,000 -----------------------------------19.1 -----------------------------15.9
SORRY, I can't get this chart to come out correct (I almost said "right")
BOTTOM LINE: EVERYONE IS ON THE DOLE
People who whine and moan about their hard earned tax dollars being doled out to deadbeats should take a look at the whole entitlements budget. They might become more outraged when the find out who the real welfare queens are. Total AFDC and Food Stamp budgets makes up less than 2% of all Federal and State Budgets. That’s about $24 Billion. That may sound like a lot, but the Federal subsidies just for private businesses cost taxpayers $87 billion the same year.
Here’s a statistic that should steam up the fiscal conservative: Wal-Mart, the world's largest retailer, has benefited from more than $1 billion in economic development subsidies from state and local governments across the United States. Why? It’s beyond me. But it’s sure easier to rant on about those deadbeats using food stamps in the local grocery store. So, add in subsidies for record profit making oil companies, mega farms, defense contractors and we get a better picture of the real welfare queens.
I agree that the welfare system of the 70s needed reform and it was successfully reformed under the Clinton Administration. On a National average, AFDF dropped 40% across the country and most of 40% are working now. That's good. But, I still believe that a civilized society has a responsibility to protect the disadvantaged, even if we have to protect some of them from themselves.
If this doesn’t change your perspective about “welfare”, then let’s use the almighty right wing “common sense”. If you stop all the welfare programs for the disadvantaged you’ll soon be stepping over those sleeping bodies when you come out of the Black River Club after your Rotary Luncheon and Award Ceremony. We wouldn’t want that now would we.
People who whine and moan about their hard earned tax dollars being doled out to deadbeats should take a look at the whole entitlements budget. They might become more outraged when the find out who the real welfare queens are. Total AFDC and Food Stamp budgets makes up less than 2% of all Federal and State Budgets. That’s about $24 Billion. That may sound like a lot, but the Federal subsidies just for private businesses cost taxpayers $87 billion the same year.
Here’s a statistic that should steam up the fiscal conservative: Wal-Mart, the world's largest retailer, has benefited from more than $1 billion in economic development subsidies from state and local governments across the United States. Why? It’s beyond me. But it’s sure easier to rant on about those deadbeats using food stamps in the local grocery store. So, add in subsidies for record profit making oil companies, mega farms, defense contractors and we get a better picture of the real welfare queens.
I agree that the welfare system of the 70s needed reform and it was successfully reformed under the Clinton Administration. On a National average, AFDF dropped 40% across the country and most of 40% are working now. That's good. But, I still believe that a civilized society has a responsibility to protect the disadvantaged, even if we have to protect some of them from themselves.
If this doesn’t change your perspective about “welfare”, then let’s use the almighty right wing “common sense”. If you stop all the welfare programs for the disadvantaged you’ll soon be stepping over those sleeping bodies when you come out of the Black River Club after your Rotary Luncheon and Award Ceremony. We wouldn’t want that now would we.
Saturday, December 29, 2007
IMPEACH CHENEY NOW
Want to sign Congressman Robert Wexler's petition to impeach VP Cheney?
go to: http://wexlerwantshearings.com/
go to: http://wexlerwantshearings.com/
Friday, December 28, 2007
VLADAMIR PUTIN'S REVIEW OF CHARLIE WILSON'S WAR
After seeing Charlie Wilson’s War I thought about Vladamir Putin watching the same movie in the Red Square Multiplex in Moscow. I wondered what he thought about it.
Was he was amused at Charlie’s sexual escapades and drug and alcohol binges? Did he laugh at Charlie’s secretary’s line, “Charlie say’s you can teach a secretary to type but you can’t teach them to grow tits”? Was there steam coming out of his ears as he watched the footage of Russian helicopters being blown out of the sky with US supplied stinger missiles? He probably didn’t appreciate the great acting by Tom Hanks and Seymour Hoffman, or what a babe Julie Roberts is, even at her advancing age. Did he understand that the lines about Russian soldiers bayoneting pregnant women and slitting the throats of children was just “artistic license”? No, he seems like a pretty serious guy to me. I’ll be he didn’t crack a smile through the whole movie.
I’ll bet he still remembers the dead (14,453) Russians, sick and wounded (469,685), permanently disabled (469,685), loss of 118 aircraft, 333 helicopters, 147 tanks, 1,314 IFV/APCs, 433 artillery guns and mortars , 1,138 radio sets and command vehicles, 510 engineering vehicles, 11,369 trucks and petrol tankers. I’ll bet he doesn’t think Charlie is a hero.
Putin’s a scarey guy. He was KGB. He’s the most powerful guy in Russia, a soon to be resurected super power. He makes people drop dead from drinking tea in a sidwalk café. He has lots of nukes. He has lots of oil. He has lots of friends who also remember Charlie’s war and I’ll bet none of them remember it as a comedy.
As Russia becomes a stronger economic and military nation, I worry about what Putin thought about Charlie Wilson’s War.
Was he was amused at Charlie’s sexual escapades and drug and alcohol binges? Did he laugh at Charlie’s secretary’s line, “Charlie say’s you can teach a secretary to type but you can’t teach them to grow tits”? Was there steam coming out of his ears as he watched the footage of Russian helicopters being blown out of the sky with US supplied stinger missiles? He probably didn’t appreciate the great acting by Tom Hanks and Seymour Hoffman, or what a babe Julie Roberts is, even at her advancing age. Did he understand that the lines about Russian soldiers bayoneting pregnant women and slitting the throats of children was just “artistic license”? No, he seems like a pretty serious guy to me. I’ll be he didn’t crack a smile through the whole movie.
I’ll bet he still remembers the dead (14,453) Russians, sick and wounded (469,685), permanently disabled (469,685), loss of 118 aircraft, 333 helicopters, 147 tanks, 1,314 IFV/APCs, 433 artillery guns and mortars , 1,138 radio sets and command vehicles, 510 engineering vehicles, 11,369 trucks and petrol tankers. I’ll bet he doesn’t think Charlie is a hero.
Putin’s a scarey guy. He was KGB. He’s the most powerful guy in Russia, a soon to be resurected super power. He makes people drop dead from drinking tea in a sidwalk café. He has lots of nukes. He has lots of oil. He has lots of friends who also remember Charlie’s war and I’ll bet none of them remember it as a comedy.
As Russia becomes a stronger economic and military nation, I worry about what Putin thought about Charlie Wilson’s War.
WHY I'M NOT A REPUBLICAN
In my never ending quest to understand Republican voters, I’m exploring the blogs of the Right. It is interesting, enlightening, frustrating and sometimes nauseating. It can be like watching Ann Coulter after eating bad sea food. The twists and turns and spin and code talk that pass as the truth are sometimes hard to follow. I try to practice critical thinking, logic and work with facts in spite of the emotions that interfere.
The following reasons for Why Am I A Republican? come from the site:
http://www.jeffgop.org/ My comments are added.
Why Am I A Republican?
The following reasons for Why Am I A Republican? come from the site:
http://www.jeffgop.org/ My comments are added.
Why Am I A Republican?
I believe in the promise of America and the goodness of the American people.
I believe in the goodness of the American people but there are scoundrels and despots who, if allowed, will destroy the principles America was founded on. The promise of America depends on the people governing through their elected officials.
I believe that the roots of our society are found in strong families, personal faith, solid communities, and love of country.
I believe that the roots of our society are found in the Constitution of the United States of America which protects individual rights to participate in family and faith as they see fit. I believe that love of country does not preclude criticism of the elected officials.
I believe that our flag, the "Stars and Stripes", is a true and unique symbol of the pride and patriotism Americans share in their beloved nation.
I believe that the prestige of the American Flag in the world community is defined by the character of America’s leaders and policies. It is sad how the prestige of American Flag has suffered from the current Republican Administration’s foreign policies in the last 7 years.
I believe that America is still the "shining city on a hill", and represents the dreams and aspirations of current and future generations of American citizens.
I’m concerned about future generations who will inherit the record national debt, a rising superpower in Russia, economic dominance by China, a deteriorating environment, and a diplomatically impotent America. They will lie in the bed Bush made.
I believe that our government is best when it is closest to the people that it serves.
Why do Republicans continue to support the Bush/Cheney NEOCON administration when it repeatedly ignores the will of the majority of the people it serves and pander to the corporate elite?
I believe that government and governmental programs should be efficient, and provide full accountability for the practices and policies it's leaders propose and implement.
Who in their right mind would not agree with efficiency and accountability. But how does gutting Federal agencies and de-regulation provide accountability and efficiency.
I believe in the spirit of free enterprise, in which capitalism is the best means to keep our economy running strong, both now and in the future.
Capitalism without government oversight and regulation is a recipe for exploitation, environmental catastrophe, economic collapse. Government must protect society from the Corporation who’s only god is power, control and the immediate bottom line.
I believe that while government can and should be the provider of some essential services, it should function with limited taxation, financial efficiency and the adoption of innovations to allow taxpayers to get the most for their hard-earned tax dollars.
The government has a fundamental responsibility to assist and protect poor and disadvantaged citizens. A society where the “middle” socioeconomic class becomes poor and the “lower” class becomes destitute while the “upper” class continues to grow richer is a moral outrage.
I believe that America's military is the most powerful military force in the world, and that our brave men and women who serve our nation deserve the respect and admiration a grateful nation can only bestow.
How long can America sustain the most powerful military force in the world when we are spending $15 billion a MONTH to fight a futile war in Iraq. How long can we maintain the most powerful military force in the world when we have lowered recruiting standards to accept felons and drug users, back to back deployments are exhausting the Army and Marines, and we are incapable of fighting on a third front.
I believe that governments first and foremost responsibility is the providing of safety and security to our citizens.
I believe that government has first and foremost responsibility to provide safety and security for it’s citizens while operating within the framework of the Constitution of the United States.
I believe that the rights of law-abiding citizens should outweigh the rights of criminals and that the enforcement of existing laws, combined with the addition of innovative, common-sense policies, is the best means of furthering a civil society.
Sounds like code talk for throwing out civil rights (which even criminals have) and establishing a police state. “Common sense policies” should never override “rule of law” established by the Judiciary within the framework of the Constitution.
I believe that our natural environment is a precious resource for all humankind, and that citizens and government should work together to implement common-sense policies that allow for both environmental protection and economic growth.
Future economic growth is dependent on sound environmental policies. Not “common-sense policies”, but scientifically based policies. Corporate goals of short term profit at the expense of the environment will not sustain an economy in the long term.
I believe that in the spirit of Abraham Lincoln, all persons are created equal, and that I oppose discrimination in any form, against any person, and for any reason.
It is government’s responsibility to provide for a level playing field for disadvantaged and oppressed citizens to access equal opportunity and walk through the gates of the “Shining city on the hill”.
I believe in an inclusive political party, a party with a "big tent" approach where I am encouraged to share my beliefs and to disagree with those who share opposing viewpoints.
Ditto. Then we both must distain labeling dissenters “unpatriotic” or “terrorists” or “America haters”.
I believe that Republican Party leaders and officials have brought needed change to New York State and I agree that supporting their efforts is the best way to ensure a brighter future for many years to come. (nygop.org)
I believe the Republican Party’s will continue to lose influence in New York as it is in national politics.
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
What's a Liberal?
Liberal Values
Liberals believe individuals should doubt their own truths and consider fairly and open-mindedly the truths of others. Liberals believe individuals should be tolerant and respectful of difference. Liberals believe individuals have both a right and a responsibility to participate in public debate. Liberals believe “we the people” are the governors and not the subjects of government, and that government must treat each person with that in mind. Liberals believe government must respect and affirmatively safeguard the liberty, equality and dignity of each individual. Liberals believe government has a fundamental responsibility to help those who are less fortunate. Liberals believe government should never act on the basis of sectarian faith. Liberals believe courts have a special responsibility to protect individual liberties. Liberals believe government must protect the safety and security of the people, for without such protection liberalism is impossible. Liberals believe government must protect the safety and security of the people, without unnecessarily sacrificing constitutional values.
Geoffrey Stone, University of Chicago, The Law School
CHARLIE WILSON'S CRIMES
CHARLIE WILSON’S WAR
None of the reviewers I’ve read seem the least bit disturbed that we were killing Russians as sure as if we were in a “hot war” instead of a cold one. They justified this in the movie with claims that the Russian soldiers were ”bayoneting pregnant women”, “slitting children’s throats in the town square”, and “giving children toys that blew their arms off”. Right, and we invaded Iraq because they had WMD. If you DON’T have a problem with the CIA (a terrorist organization?) providing weapons to kill Russians, then you CAN’T complain about Iran’s Royal (whatever) Guard (a terrorist organization) providing arms to kill Americans.
I don’t agree with Russia occupying Afghanistan but there could have been other ways to get them out.
Wilson was portrayed as a nice guy who was drunk most of the time. In his fog, his motivation for providing arms to Afgans had more to do with getting another fuck from the Texas Jesus Lady than any patriotic leanings. The overall treatment of Wilson by Hanks tended to normalize his drug use, sexual exploits, alcoholism, and gun running, as harmless fumbling of a well intended bungler. My opinion is he was/is an alcoholic drug addict felon tool of the Right Wing Christian Republican Party.
The 9/11 connection was made when, after the last Russian left Afghanistan, the Hoffman character warned Wilson of the dangers of walking away from it. He pointed out that most of the male population was 14 years of age. Wilson went after $100M to build schools and the Committee blew him off with “Nobody wants to build schools in Afghanistan?”
I understand that the book “Charlie Wilson’s War” ended with Wilson watching the WTC collapsing. The movie made that connection very subtly. I also understand that Wilson, who left Congress in 1996, is still running a “Consulting Firm” that works exclusively with the Pakistan government.
I’m most disturbed that reaction to the movie’s content seems to be more amusement than alarm. In reality, Wilson’s war was no less a crime than the Iran Contra Affair. It has the same dangerous consequences of a renegade entity operating without the checks and balances established in the Constitution. I guess in the last seven years we have become accustomed to our government functioning outside the framework of the constitution. Ho! Hum! Business as usual.
None of the reviewers I’ve read seem the least bit disturbed that we were killing Russians as sure as if we were in a “hot war” instead of a cold one. They justified this in the movie with claims that the Russian soldiers were ”bayoneting pregnant women”, “slitting children’s throats in the town square”, and “giving children toys that blew their arms off”. Right, and we invaded Iraq because they had WMD. If you DON’T have a problem with the CIA (a terrorist organization?) providing weapons to kill Russians, then you CAN’T complain about Iran’s Royal (whatever) Guard (a terrorist organization) providing arms to kill Americans.
I don’t agree with Russia occupying Afghanistan but there could have been other ways to get them out.
Wilson was portrayed as a nice guy who was drunk most of the time. In his fog, his motivation for providing arms to Afgans had more to do with getting another fuck from the Texas Jesus Lady than any patriotic leanings. The overall treatment of Wilson by Hanks tended to normalize his drug use, sexual exploits, alcoholism, and gun running, as harmless fumbling of a well intended bungler. My opinion is he was/is an alcoholic drug addict felon tool of the Right Wing Christian Republican Party.
The 9/11 connection was made when, after the last Russian left Afghanistan, the Hoffman character warned Wilson of the dangers of walking away from it. He pointed out that most of the male population was 14 years of age. Wilson went after $100M to build schools and the Committee blew him off with “Nobody wants to build schools in Afghanistan?”
I understand that the book “Charlie Wilson’s War” ended with Wilson watching the WTC collapsing. The movie made that connection very subtly. I also understand that Wilson, who left Congress in 1996, is still running a “Consulting Firm” that works exclusively with the Pakistan government.
I’m most disturbed that reaction to the movie’s content seems to be more amusement than alarm. In reality, Wilson’s war was no less a crime than the Iran Contra Affair. It has the same dangerous consequences of a renegade entity operating without the checks and balances established in the Constitution. I guess in the last seven years we have become accustomed to our government functioning outside the framework of the constitution. Ho! Hum! Business as usual.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
