Danny on Politics

Occupy Cal video: Police brutally beat, arrest Berkeley students

2011-11-15T19:41:00.000-08:00

Well this is insane. This was clearly a non-violent protest as these students were simply standing there when the police began beating them. The kid in the bushes on the left is being beaten from all sides. Those batons hurt I am sure.

And Chancellor Robert Birgeneau clearly has to go after he initially said the protesters' actions were worthy of police action during last week's campus conflict, writing in an email to the campus community:

“It is unfortunate that some protesters chose to obstruct the police by linking arms and forming a human chain to prevent the police from gaining access to the tents. This is not non-violent civil disobedience.”

Linking arms is not "non-violent civil disobedience"? Damn I guess Cal has been quite for awhile and the powers that be forgot what protests are like.

I gotta weigh in...on politics and the future of our country

2011-11-10T09:53:00.000-08:00

Well I have been too busy to rant about politics lately even though there has been a tremendous amount to talk about. New information from the Census Bureau about the increasing poverty and financial disparity in this country; politicians gearing up for a new election; historic grass roots protests; record profits being made by the oil industry, yet again (while their tax payer subsidies have been protected at all costs by the Republicans in Washington), and general gridlock in Washington with the Republicans refusing to allow any problems to be solved for as they said "why we would we hand Obama a win?"

I could go on about each of these but first consider the latter - if the government solves any of the major problems we face it will be considered a win for Obama and this is exactly what the Republicans don't want to see. And ironically if Obama loses because he has failed to solve the problems the Republicans have promised to do more of what caused the problems in the first place - deregulate and cut taxes.

The main thing I want to weigh in on today is this notion that the government and taxes are bad. This idea is killing this country. First of all our education and infrastructure are dismal and these are the investments that we need to have a future as a nation. Second the world is at a turning point right now, we are seeing limits in our corporate capitalistic system, new technologies promise clean and limitless energy, global climate change driven by our burning of fossil fuels is causing expensive and devastating damage more and more frequently, and many of the world's food and water supplies are on the brink of collapse. Yet there are solutions to these problems.

Reagan was the catalyst for the downfall of America with his famous quote "The government is the problem, not the solution" and this idea lives on strong today in conservative politics with Rick Perry yesterday in the Republican debate saying when he becomes president he will completely abolish three government agencies: the Department of Commerce, the Department of Education, and well he could not for the life of him remember the third! He later said the Department of Energy.

So let us look at this conservative philosophy. The mission of the Department of Commerce is to: "promote job creation and improved living standards for all Americans by creating an infrastructure that promotes economic growth, technological competitiveness, and sustainable development." The department of Education - obvious what it is concerned with, and the Department of Energy is in charge of domestic energy production and protection of our nuclear facilities and waste.

So in a time when we need jobs, we need to improve living standards (our country has by far the largest number of people living in poverty out of any developed nation), we are falling behind in technological competitiveness, sustainable development means we won't be unsustainable as a nation, our education is absolutely terrible, and our energy policy is fossilized and leading us to extinction as a world leader and has us fighting wars around the world to protect our energy interests; the conservatives want to abolish the government agencies that are in charge of fixing all these problems!

I want people running our government that believe the government can help solve these problems!!! And for the folks who believe the conservative talking points that private industry can solve these problems without government help - this nation became a leader in technology, production, middle class growth, education, etc BECAUSE of the government. When private industry has been put in charge without regulation they have shipped jobs overseas, created tax shelters in the Camen Islands, ignored infrastructure, and created economic bubbles that destroyed the economy which has hurt the majority of people while the rich actually have continued to profit.

Right now the 12,000 wealthiest families in America have as much money as the bottom 25 million families!!!!

In order to navigate the new world of emerging technologies, new promising forms of energy production, globalized markets and manufacturing, and increased threats to our global life support system we need a smart government that believes that what they do is essential in guiding and protecting this country. In a world of globalized corporations is it actually un-American, un-patriotic, treasonous even, to suggest that we should put them in charge and get rid of or make ineffectual our government. The government is supposed to be by the people for the people and corporations do not have that mission statement. They exist for profit and they increasingly benefit the small class of corporate elites who control them.

The problem is not the government, it is the control of our government by the corporate class. The occupy protesters have a ton of very good issues they are concerned about but number one on their list for getting this country back needs to be getting the money out of our political system.

In case anyone wants to help take a small but essential step toward that they should contact all of congress and the White House and tell them to support the constitutional amendment that would overturn the Citizens United ruling (that allows corporations to give unlimited amounts of money towards political campaigns under the guise of free speech). This amendment was put forth by the following brave senators: (all Democrats of course) - Tom Udall (NM), Michael Bennett (CO), Tom Harkin (IA), Dick Durbin (IL), Chuck Schumer (NY), Sheldon Whitehouse (RI), and Jeff Merkely (OR)

Interview with the Marine who took on the NYPD

2011-10-26T22:09:00.000-07:00

Here is a nice interview with the marine who took on a group of NYPD who had been hurting the unarmed peaceful protesters at Wall Street.

war veteran wounded by Oakland PD during peaceful protest

2011-10-26T22:00:00.000-07:00

So I have not had time to comment on the incredible movement happening in the country - the Occupy Wallstreet protests and the spin offs around the country and world. But anyone who is proud of this country and of the strides we made thanks to protesters during the civil rights and Vietnam eras should be happy to see people engaged in peaceful protests once again. Of course the government is not so open to allowing protests, just as it was not in the past, as we can see by the police around the country pepper spraying, beating, using tear gas, and rubber bullets on protesters who have been nonviolent and just standing there while cops have shot at them form the sidelines. Here is a video showing the cops throwing a flash bang grenade into a group of people helping a veteran who was hit in the head with a tear gas canister...

I just ordered a cutome magnet to support the protests...

2011-10-06T10:48:00.000-07:00

Hey there,
I just ordered a custom "I support the protesters" magnet. Doin what I can while I am too busy to occupy any place other than my home and school...order one and spread the word....

Make your custom magnet at SupportOurRibbons.com

assisinating the Nobel Peace Prize

2011-09-30T22:20:00.000-07:00

Remember when Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize right after taking office. It was true that Obama becoming president, many of the words he spoke during the campaign, and the movement of people who wanted 'Change' all inspired dreams of peace. After Bush terms of war, Peace, was the change most of the world was looking for.

Of course Obama never promised peace (although many of his speeches implied it) but few predicted he would move us into the territory we are now in. I think he has basically been taken advantage of. He was a bit of an outsider and he kept much of the old guard in charge, which meant they knew how to get what they wanted. A perfect example I heard of this week was Obama's sale of deep penetrating bunker buster bombs to Israel. These were wanted for an attack on Iran and the Bush administration had refused to sell them to Israel. The Obama administration sold them the weapons six months after Obama took office. You know he wanted to be seen as supporting Israel and the powers to be saw the opportunity to act.

So I suspect the same has happened with Obama's massive expansion of the drone assassinations - including the one just today of an American citizen. The President ordering an execution of an American without a trial is new territory. We got mad at Bush for DETAINING Americans without a warrant and not Obama is ordering fools assassinated. That smacks of authoritarianism. Now Obama has already been ordering assassinations of non Americans. And these assassinations are happening is countries where we are not officially at war. To me there is no difference where a person is from, assassinating them is wrong. But as far as the law in this country goes, there is a big difference and Obama is pushing the limits beyond what Bush/Cheney did.

Now of course the targets of these assassinations are often clearly 'enemies' of this country. Our argument for killing this guy today is that he influences people to attack America. Well by assassinating him are we really convincing his followers that we should not be attacked? OF course not, with every drone attack we make more enemies. Our "war on terror" is a war of terror and the more people we kill and homes we destroy the more 'terrorists' we create. It makes me sick and while I think things are largely out of Obama's control, it is sad that he was given the Nobel Prize for Peace, for he is commander in chief over an expanding war of global scale that is pushing the rule of law as well as that of morality.

If I broke the law and killed people...

2011-09-15T18:34:00.000-07:00

The double standard is infuriating. All this "debate" about corporations and how they don't need regulation, the free market will keep them responsible, the supreme court has even said they are people and can contribute endless money toward politics. Conservatives seem to think they should be above the law and be able to buy politicians.

In the news this week are a couple stories that demonstrate the double standard between real people and corporations. What would happen to me if I broke the law and it led to the deaths of numerous people? I think I would be in a little trouble. Like the mom who recently crossed a street illegally (j-walking) and a drunk driver killed her young child. The Mom is being prosecuted. Or the case of Troy Davis who is on Death Row. He is accused of killing a cop but 10 witnesses in the case have signed affidavits recanting their testimony and indicating that police coerced them into implicating Davis and there is no physical evidence linking him to the killing.

The same day I hear talk of this story the government released a damning report blaming BP, Transocean, and Halliburton for the accident. It says BP violated several Federal Regulations, cut corners, and failed required safety procedures. So they broke the law and people died. BP has done this before, BP is a serial killer. And even though the supreme court considers BP a person can BP go to Death Row? Can BP get the Death Penalty? BP is actually doing well right now financially and is opening new contracts around the world. Meanwhile many businesses in the Gulf have not rebounded. And as I write this the news is talking about clean up workers from the spill who are sick from the dispersants BP dumped.

Corporations should not have it both ways. If they want to be 'people' then they need to be held accountable for crimes like people.

If nothing else seeing the disregard for safety and regulations by all three corporations involved in this accident should remind people why we need stronger regulations and enforcement for corporations (which have no conscience) rather than less.

Danny, the Burning Van, and 9/11

2011-09-11T08:26:00.000-07:00

In the summer of 2001 my boss at the time, Bob Licht of Sea Trek, told me he knew of the perfect car for me. I would learn later that he had told others it was an eye sore, but he was right - it was perfect for me. It was a 1984 Dodge Ram Van with broken windows and a stripped out interior. I bought it for $700, moved out of the '82 Toyota long bed 4x4 I had been living in for 3 years, and moved into what would be my home for the next few years (until Anke was 7 months pregnant and we were forced to start paying rent). Using all salvaged materials I made the interior homey by building a bed, cabinets, surfboard rack, and I put in wood paneling and carpet to finish it off. Before I drove it to Burning Man that year I painted flames on the side and in big bold letters christened it "The Burning Van".

A few days after returning from the Playa (A.K.A Burning Man) I was in a coffee shop in Mendocino with my fellow kayak instructors when we heard the news of the 9/11 attacks live on the radio. We would spend the day away from media, enjoying the incredible Mendocino coast by kayak. We explored caves, surfed over rocks and down waterfalls on the other side, shot through tunnels, and enjoyed the peacefulness of nature in the company of good friends on a day that we knew was going to change the course of history. We had an exceptional day that day, the tragedy of the morning reminding us how precious life is.

Back in the real world (it was weeks before I would see the images of the attacks on a TV - something my van was not equipped with) I was overwhelmed by the drum beats for war and the complete lack of representation of any nonviolent solution in the media. There was a complete blackout of any opinions that went against the Bush Administration's push for war and even congress was caught up in the fury - Barbara Lee being the only single person in the House of Representatives to vote against the resolution to attack Afghanistan. I felt like I had to say something and the biggest "voice" I had was my new found mobile billboard. So a week after 9/11 I painted a big red peace sign and the quote from Gandhi: "An eye for an eye will make the world blind".

Of course the Bush Administration was waiting for an excuse to got to war. In 1999 Cheney, Ashcroft, Wolfowitz, and many more had signed a document for the New American Century that said America must dominate the world through war and that in order to get the American people behind such a radical mission we needed a "new Pearl Harbor". Well they got what they wished for and off to war we went.

There was such a feeling created by the media and the government that to talk about peace was unpatriotic that I had a friend who asked me not to paint a peace sign on my van for fear of my safety. Well it felt good to speak out in what way I could and the van became an ever changing work in progress that would last me years. I often reacted to main stream media and current events. When we launched the War On Terror, I painted a line through the "On" and replaced it with "Is". When everyone started putting up "God Bless America" signs, I painted a globe and wrote "Goddess Bless the World". Later when we went to war with Iraq I painted "God Bless Iraq". I had in large letters for much of the time "The Bush Administration is a Terrorist Organization".

It was a very interesting experiment in free speech. I had an incredible amount of interactions with people. Some folks followed me so they could give me a hug. Many told me that it was the only time they saw something that spoke what they wish they had the courage to say. People left me notes, CDs, books. One time a guy walked into a coffee shop and asked who's van that was out front. I said it was mine. He told me I had a parking ticket and that he would like to pay for it. One time I needed a tow and the tow truck driver said "wow! a real life hippy van!" and then he towed me to Ocean Beach (I wanted to wake up for the dawn patrol) for free. The van was even put in the book "America 24/7".

Of course not all the comments were good. I got hate notes, middle fingers, and lots of disapproving head shakes. Once in Orange County while visiting a friend his neighbor asked me not to park it in front of his house. In fact in San Francisco in Pac Heights where I was working as a substitute teacher in a rich private all boys school a lady came out one day and asked me to park in front of my own house. When I told her that I worked nearby she said that the people in the neighborhood were offended by my van. After explaining to her why I did it she warmed up and said "well, you are a good artist!" The hate I felt multiplied exponentially after we went to war with Iraq. Once that happened, people got crazy. People would say things like: "I was against the war before it started, but now that we are in it you have to support it." The government was clever in blurring the line between supporting the troops and supporting the war. I always thought the best way to support the troops was to try and prevent or end the war so they could come home.

When I traveled I began writing on t-shirts, especially when I flew. When the Iraq war first started, I made one that said "God Bless Iraq". I had it on for five minutes when a guy came up to me and said "As an ex-marine.." I thought 'uh oh'. he continued: "I want to solute you for wearing that shirt." In fact most military guys who chose to talk to me about the van said they loved what I was doing. Getting off an airline once the pilot told me he did not appreciate my shirt ( the God Bless Iraq one). I said "God bless EVERYONE right?" He said "No, that's not right." Then while walking away from the plane a high school kid who had overheard him said " I think your shirt is cool." Another time I was walking through an airport in Germany with a shirt that said "Bush is a Terrorist". Two huge military guys walked past me and behind me I heard one say to the other "did you see his shirt?" ...."It's cool!"

The Burning Van was a fun vehicle/home for many years. I would say that for me, 9/11 was a terrible tragedy but it was the far worse wars that our government launched, using 9/11 as an excuse, that sparked my passion for politics. Passion is a funny word because mostly my interest in politics is simply anger/frustration at the terrible decisions which are being made every day by our government. But like the bumper sticker says: "If you aren't outraged, you're not paying attention."

Peace...

Three Graphs to Show the right wing

2011-08-29T13:52:00.000-07:00

So I know statistics can be manipulated to appear to show different things and I did not have time to analyze these ones but they are pretty straight forward. We all know the Republicans are responsible for the economic mess we are in (with plenty of help from the Democrats) so they should be of no surprise....

Three Charts to Email to Your Right-Wing Brother-In-Law

Monday 29 August 2011

by: Dave Johnson, Campaign for America's Future | Op-Ed

Federal spending dramatically increased under former president, George W. Bush and it has not increased much under President Obama. (Photo: Eric Draper / White House)

Problem: Your right-wing brother-in-law is plugged into the FOX-Limbaugh lie machine, and keeps sending you emails about "Obama spending" and "Obama deficits" and how the "Stimulus" just made things worse.

Solution: Here are three "reality-based" charts to send to him. These charts show what actually happened.

Spending

Government spending increased dramatically under Bush. It has not increased much under Obama. Note that this chart does not reflect any spending cuts resulting from deficit-cutting deals.

Deficits

Notes, this chart includes Clinton's last budget year for comparison.

The numbers in these two charts come from Budget of the United States Government: Historical Tables Fiscal Year 2012. They are just the amounts that the government spent and borrowed, period, Anyone can go look then up. Peoplewho claim that Obama "tripled the deficit" are either misled or are trying to mislead.

The Stimulus and Jobs

In this chart, the RED lines on the left side -- the ones that keep doing DOWN -- show what happened to jobs under the policies of Bush and the Republicans. We were losing lots and lots of jobs every month, and it was getting worse and worse. The BLUE lines -- the ones that just go UP -- show what happened to jobs when the stimulus was in effect. We stopped losing jobs and started gaining jobs, and it was getting better and better. The leveling off on the right side of the chart shows what happened as the stimulus started to wind down: job creation leveled off at too low a level.

It looks a lot like the stimulus reversed what was going on before the stimulus.

Conclusion: THE STIMULUS WORKED BUT WAS NOT ENOUGH!

More False Things

These are just three of the false things that everyone "knows." Some others are (click through): Obama bailed out the banks, businesses will hire if they get tax cuts, health care reform cost $1 trillion, Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme or is "going broke", government spending "takes money out of the economy."

Why This Matters

These things really matter. We all want to fix the terrible problems the country has. But it is so important to know just what the problems are before you decide how to fix them. Otherwise the things you do to try to solve those problems might just make them worse. If you get tricked into thinking that Obama has made things worse and that we should go back to what we were doing before Obama -- tax cuts for the rich, giving giant corporations and Wall Street everything they want -- when those are the things that caused the problems in the first place, then we will be in real trouble.

In his defense - why it is the wrong time for Obama

2011-08-18T05:30:00.000-07:00

Many people are down on Obama. People are saying is has failed to lead. That he is caving into the Republicans. Just recently 12 unions said they would boycott the Democratic national convention partly on for these reasons.

I am in the camp of people who are disappointed but in this blog I am going to defend Obama. It is not that he has failed to lead. It is simply that it is the wrong time for his style of leadership. A style, I might add, that is very honorable, however is arguably not very effective in today’s political climate.

Obama might be a centrist, we don’t really know what his core beliefs are. We don’t know what he would do if he was King. What we do know is that he wants compromise. He looks at both sides of an issue and then chooses a plan that is somewhere in the middle of the two sides. Take health care reform. The progressives wanted universal health care provided by the government, much like is done in pretty much every other developed nation on Earth. The conservatives wanted a purely corporate model without any government regulation (close to what we have today) where companies make profit by being middle men between people and their health care. So Obama chose a middle road. He took what many of the Democrats wanted – a single payer system, off the table of debate. Instead he proposed a public option that could be a choice for those who did not want private insurance. During the debate the Republicans refused to budge from their objection to any public option. Eventually, the new compromise was to move from Obama’s centrist proposal further to the right, leading him to drop his support of the public option. In the end, the Democrats got a few of the regulations they wanted but we ended up with a 2000 page health care bill that the Republicans helped to write (even though they still refused to the bitter end to vote for it) that really does not reform much about our system.

What many who voted for Obama hoped for was a champion of the left. Someone to balance out the pull to the right that is happening in politics today. Obama has shown us that this is not his style. The problem is, that while we have an extreme right wing controlling a significant proportion of our government, Obama’s style of taking the center as his position is giving us poor results. It is ineffective at solving our problems, to say the least. The Republicans (and now the Tea Party) do not compromise. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said his job is to prevent Obama from getting re-elected.

We will never know what would happen if Obama was a Dennis Kucinich – someone who would push for a left leaning agenda. Perhaps he would accomplish less. Perhaps what we end up with would be closer to the centrist position. If Obama had pushed for a single payer system maybe we would have ended up with a public option. While Obama’s style has been fairly ineffective we can’t know how other styles would fair. The Republican obstructionist party, the flood of corporate cash into politics, and the poor job of informing the public being done by the mass media is a perfect storm which are really to blame for the lousy work our elected officials are doing in carrying out the will of the people.

One of the biggest problems with Obama’s style is that he is trapped in Washington. He is looking at the debate in congress. He is choosing a middle ground between mostly corporate owned politicians. The majority of American people are often in support of the left side of these issues. So the legislation that ends up being passed is towards the right of the political spectrum and it is way out of line with what most Americans want. Not the most effective leadership for a democracy. But of course in an ideal world Obama would be dealing with rational leaders who want the best for the country and then perhaps his style of leadership would shine. Unfortunately that is not the kind of leaders he is dealing with. I don’t know if it would get better results but I wish we had a vocal spokesperson in the White House who would fight the fight against the Republicans and corporatists who are ruining this country.

With the Republicans refusing to compromise the debates in Washington look like this: Obama judges the desires of both sides and then starts with a proposal in between the two. After much debate the Republicans refuse to budge from their position so Obama chooses a new middle ground between his original middle position and the Republican position. This continues to happen and the end result is something far to the right and then in the end the Republicans still don't support it. It is painful to watch.

One other example: the debt debate. We had a bipartisan committee who came up with a plan to reduce the deficit. Their plan was not liked by liberals or conservatives, for which reason, many said it was a good plan. It included major spending cuts and actually lowered taxes but restructured them to close loopholes that corporate America uses to their advantage. This was not supported by the Republicans who are even against closing tax loop holes. So we had a long period of negotiation during which the Republicans refused any plan that included tax increases. In fact most of them signed a pledge written up by Grover Norquist to never raise taxes. To Obama’s credit he did offer a plan that would cut 3.5 Trillion and raise a Trillion in taxes over the next 10 years. This was refused. So now the congress has passed the buck and formed a super committee of 12 people to come up with a plan. The problem is that The Republicans on the committee have signed Norquists’ pledge to never raise taxes. So what will come out of the committee is sure to stink.

Now the Tea Party and Republicans are certainly to blame. In fact at the recent Republican debate every single candidate said they would not ever raise taxes. They all said that if there was a deal for 10 to 1 spending cuts to tax increases made to solve our debt crisis they would refuse the deal. That is who Obama is trying to compromise with.

Obama’s style of leadership has left the debate far to the right. We are likely to end up with huge cuts to Medicare and Social security (both of which the majority of Americans oppose) and we are not likely to see any new taxes on the wealthy, despite the fact that most Americans want this. Listen to the words of Bernie Sanders, Independent senator from Vermont, if you want to hear what I wish Obama would say during all this. Obama’s style of leadership would be admirable if it worked. But the results he is getting would suggest a change of strategy. It isn’t impossible for a President to change his style of leadership. In this current political landscape we need him to change if we want meaningful action from the government on any of the extremely important issues facing our nation and the world: the economy, jobs, the environment, health care, war, etc. It will be interesting if Obama finds his voice when he is campaigning next year and if he gets reelected (which I really hope he does!) it will be interesting to see how he leads during a second term.

a letter to the President

2011-07-22T07:22:00.000-07:00

Dear President Obama,
I voted for you and worked hard for your election. I have been happy with some of the things you have done but not very happy with much of it. Where I usually disagree with you is when you move too far toward the Republican position on an issue. Dropping your support for a public option during the health care debate was a perfect example.

Now we have a debate happening in our country that cuts to the root of what I see as the difference between the Republican and Democratic parties. In the economic debate leading up to the need to raise the debt ceiling, we have seen the Republicans stand firm in their demand for lowering taxes on the wealthy while making cuts that will hurt working class families. This is an ideological position of theirs. They faught medicare and social security from the beginning. Their position that lower taxes for the wealthy creates jobs is contradicted by the historical facts. The wealthy have in the past decade made more money then ever before, payed the lowest taxes in 60 years, and job growth was the worst in the same time period.

I am a teacher and father of two small children. I recently bought a house (it is in escrow) and while it was the cheapest house in our neighborhood, we will just be able to afford it. I am surprised to hear that you are supporting a "bipartisan" plan to overhaul medicare and social security (which contributes ZERO to the deficit) and to lower even further the taxes for the wealthy. To pay for these tax breaks, the plan is to get rid of tax breaks for home owners and for employer provided health care. I find it incredible that while I am going to be squeezed to the point of possibly not being able to afford my new house, people making hundreds of millions of dollars a year are going to get a further tax break.

I would find a way to make it work and not complain too much if EVERYONE was paying more taxes but if the wealthiest Americans get a further tax break while the Democrats are in the White House and control the Senate and working class families pay more in taxes, then I promise you, I will go back to voting for the Green Party, for I do not see how having the Democratic party in control is helping the American people on the major issues of the economy, health care, and the wars (drone strikes in Pakistan are another major area where I disagree with your policies).

Please stand up for the American people and do not let the Republicans walk all over you! 79% of Americans support raising taxes on the wealthy to help pay down the defecit. Which side of the debate will you come down on?

Losing Hope,

Danny Boyer

why the Republicans are giving me hope

2011-07-18T07:02:00.000-07:00

So I gotta say the Republicans these days are giving me a little more hope than I had just a few months ago. The Republicans have gained control of the House and of a number of state governments. With that new found power they are aggressively pursuing their legislative agenda. As the American people watch, it should be all too clear what the Republican Party's priorities are and that these priorities in every case go against what the majority of people in this country want, in fact their agenda goes against what the majority of Republican voters want. Not only that, their positions disregard evidence and fact, their actions are destroying our power around the world, they are killing jobs, and putting in jeapordy the future of this country and in fact endangering people's lives around the world.

This all gives me hope. Hope that at some point the American people will realize that the Republican politicians are not doing what is good for the country and they will stop electing them! This of course applies to many conservative Democrats as well.

So what are the priorities of the Republicans politicians? The first thing they did when they took over the House in January was disband the committee to study climate change and attack climate change legislation and regulation from all angles. Next they went after funding for womens health and family planning, most notably defunding Planned Parenthood. And of course their two main priorities - we can see it in their campaign promises and their current actions all over the country - decrease taxes for the wealthy and further deregulate the actions of corporations.

It is ironic - the cause of our current economic problem (high debt, the recession, low emplyment) were all cause by lowering taxes on the wealthy (while starting wars which are now predicited to cost 4 trillion dollars) and by deregulating the banking industry.

The debt ceiling and economic debate going on right now is a perfect example of all this. Our government is running up a debt. Thanks to wars and tax breaks, exasperated by the housing bubble collapse and the current recession. In order to reduce the debt there are two things we can do - cut spending and increase taxes. The majority of Americans think we should do a combination of both of these things. The majority of Republican voters thing we should do both. Yet the Republicans in the House have actually pledged to not ever raise any taxes. They have gone as far as saying they will not close tax loopholes that are exploited by corporations because that will in effect raise taxes. Now comes the debt ceiling issue. We need to raise the debt ceiling or risk defaulting on out debt. Republicans say they will not vote to do this without deep spending cuts to medicare, social security (which does not even add to our debt), education, etc (something else the American people disagree with the Republicans on). America is actually losing credibility in the world because the global economy could be dealt such a blow by a default on our payments and the Republicans are threatening to let it happen because they are completely unwilling to comprimise on the tax issue. The world thinks we are crazy! The obvious answer to our problem is that we cut spending and raise taxes.

We currently have the 2nd lowest tax rate of developed nations and the lowest taxes in 70 years. Some of the most profitable corporations pay little or no taxes at all thanks to all sorts of loop holes which were put in by politicians for hire. The Republicans claim you can't raise taxes or it will kill jobs. The fact is when taxes were highest in the 50's and 60's (over 70% for the wealthiest people) we had the highest rate of job growth and the worst job growth ever was during the Bush years when we had the lowest taxes. So there is no evidence for the Republican claim, in fact the evidence suggests the opposite of what they say is true.

Regardless of who you believe, this is a democracy and in a democracy you must compromise. The fact that the Republicans won't compromise is astounding. The bipartisan deficit commission actally laid out a plan that lowers taxes but closes loopholes, cuts spending, and solves our debt problem. The Republicans in power will not even agree to this plan.

Throughout the country we see states slashing spending, teachers being fired, unions under attack, while at the SAME TIME cutting even further the taxes for the wealthy. It is insane.

Switch gears. The Republican attack on Planned Parenthood. A Republican congressman gave a speech in congress saying that "90% of what planned parenthood does is give abortions". When he was later called on this lie (the truth is that 10% of what they do are abortions) his spokesperson said that his speech "was not intended to be factual". That so well illustrates what kind of people we are dealing with. Facts don't mean anything to them! The are basically trying to run the country like a theocracy. They have their belief system and they will make decisions based on that belief system not matter what the facts are.

Climate change is another example, and a serious one. At the request of congress the National Academy of Sciences wrote up a report outlining the scientific communities ideas about climate change. They concluded that the science is settled. 97% of scientists agree climate change is real and most likely caused by humans. The Republican party is the only major political party on EARTH that denies the reality of climate change. Sure, in other countries parties disagree on what should be done about it, but they all accept that it is most likely happening. Here we have the most severe droughts, floods, tornadoes, hurricanes, cold spells, heat waves, in decades or even centuries, all happening around the world with more frequency. Shouldn't we at least consider that the scientist might be right? Well not if you have faith in the story that the Republican party is telling.

Of course climate change hurts our economy, and makes the world less safe, endangering our national security. And combating climate change would create jobs and make us competitive in the world (we are falling WAY behind in what Obama called the new Sputnick moment of our generation - new energy technologies). And all thanks to the Republicans who kill anything that could help develop new energy and combat the threat of climate change.

The last pillar of the Republican party - deregulation. Just as natual disasters give us evidence of climate change, human caused diasters show us that industry MUST be regulated. Massy energy - coal mines that kill miners in America - they keep fake safety reports and are guilty of tens of thousands of safety violations. The BP oil spill, turns out BP has a terrible record of cutting corners to save money at the cost of safety. The nuclear melt down in Japan - turns out the nuclear industry there had been faking safety records. The banking industry here was guilty if widespread fraud and criminal activity that led to our current recession, people losing their homes, etc. Over and over again we have been shown that the corporations will try to make money regardless of the cost to human lives, the economy, the environment, etc. The job of the government is to regulate these industries to make sure they act responsibly. Of course the Republicans don't think so.

I can go on and on, look at health care. The Republicans are running for office with the promise to repeal "Obamacare". Our expensive health care industry is helping to destroy the middle class as well as making manufacturing in this country unable to compete with other countries that have national health care.

I lost the end of my rant, but you get the point,

peace out

Thanks to the Germans for the type of leadership the world needs!

2011-05-31T09:24:00.000-07:00

The kind of leadership the world needs, not the "clean coal and nuclear is safe now" corporate line that Obama is taking. The Germans hit the streets - 100,000 of them in protest of their nuclear industry, they get the credit for this really. The politicians tend to follow - where are our protesters?

From Democracy Now:

Germany Announces Plans To Close Nuclear Plants Amid Massive Protests

Germany has announced plans to close its 17 nuclear power plants by 2022. Chancellor Angela Merkel described the move as a revolution in energy supply.

German Chancellor, Angela Merkel: "Step by step, we will abandon nuclear energy by the end of 2022. This path is a big challenge for Germany, but it also means huge opportunities for future generations. We believe that our country can become a front runner for the creation of renewable energy and as the first large industrial nation, we can create such a change towards highly efficient and renewable energies, with all its opportunities for export, developments and technology which create jobs."

The safety of Germany’s nuclear plants has come under increased scrutiny in the wake of Japan’s ongoing nuclear crisis. Angela Merkel announced the nuclear phase-out two days after an estimated 100,000 anti-nuclear protesters gathered in 20 German cities.

The (Republican) Circus is coming to town

2011-05-03T08:56:00.001-07:00

So I have been too busy to comment much on politics, although with the lunatics in charge of they asylum (The House of Representatives) I have plenty to say.

But the fun is just beginning as the circus is coming to town - gearing up for the 2012 Presidential elections. I am not ready for another election, but as painful as it is going to be, it will hopefully provide for some laughs. (I laugh to avoid crying)

Certainly the best clown for the circus is Donald Trump. Not too likely to win the nomination but he is getting a lot of media attention. This is a man who, despite all the evidence and facts that have been presented to prove Obama was actually born in Hawaii (even Fox news has admitted as such), Trump was still questioning the fact (as have other Republican politicians). Obama last week had the long form of the birth certificate released and he said in response to Trump that there is not time for such distractions and we need to focus on the problems America faces.

In response to the release - Trump said he was "proud" to have pushed the birther issue. Imagine, someone who is proud to ignore facts for political gain wanting to be president, oh, I forgot, he is a Republican, that is what they do.

So now that the birth issue is settled, what was the issue Trump moved to next? Now he is questioning Obama's grades in school.

I did hear Trump comment on one real issue - regulation. He states the republican position painfully well. He said that the high gas prices was due to Obama and the regulations he put in place after the BP Gulf oil spill. Trump said government regulations should be gotten rid of. He said - 'sure, we will have oil spills, but we will clean them up and move on, no big deal.'

This stance is of course ridiculous if you are concerned about the economy. How many small businesses - fishermen, hotels, restaurants, tour guides, etc, went out of business due to the spill? What is the long term effect on America's largest economic fishery? Not to mention the death of animals and the death of the workers on the rig. Of course new regulations is not what we need as much as enforcement of current ones. The other reason the republican stance on this is is foolish is that Obama actually did not go overboard in regulating the oil industry, quite the opposite, in every instance the Republicans complain about too much regulation (financial, oil, nuclear), Obama has actually given in to industry far more than he has protected the people. Their premise that Obama is overreaching with government regulation is just false.

My class is coming in so I am going to go, it is going to be an interesting election year if nothing else.

Peace...

Bernie Sanders has it right! It is not rocket science.

2011-04-14T15:31:00.000-07:00

Video: GOP mocks nuclear safety

2011-03-16T12:09:00.000-07:00

Here is a great little video of some GOP senators mocking nuclear safety.

Nuclear energy is subsidized by the tax payers - much of that money is used to buy politicians which is why there is so much support for an industry that creates highly toxic waste that will last tens of thousands of years. Intelligent.

The GOP wants to end Unions because they give money to Democrats and influence politicians. I would be fine with ending the money coming from unions into politics if we ended the money from toxic radioactive corporations and Billionaires like the Koch brothers influencing politics too. Can you say "reverse Citizens United please"!

just say no to Nuclear power, duh

2011-03-14T14:45:00.000-07:00

It seems obvious to me, nuclear power is a bad idea.

With respect to the people in Japan and those around the world who are concerned about them, I will not turn this into a cynical rant about reasons why the nuclear industry has such a strong hold on our government and governments around the world. One of the few things Democrats and Republicans agree on is that we should build new nuclear reactors here and around the world. (They also agree that Iran should not build them.)

I understand there are those who put forth arguments in favor of nuclear power. It can supply a lot of electricity.

But spreading such a dangerous technology all over the world seems plain stupid. How can we ever expect there will not be an accident (caused by nature, terrorism, human error, whatever). How can we think producing radioactive waste is a good idea?

Our elected leaders will only follow. Right now they are being led by money. People need to get out and have their voices heard if they are against nuclear power (and weapons).

There are many power plants around the world who's contracts are being considered for renewal. These must be shut down. New nuclear power plants should not be built.

It costs billions of dollars to build nuclear power plants and to protect them and their waste. That money would go far in the wind and solar industry.

The Federal Government: Robin the Hood

2011-02-14T08:00:00.000-08:00

Well I was gonna start out by blaming Obama, as his new budget proposes major cuts in domestic spending. Things like heating assistance for low income families so they don't freeze (or starve by spending their money on heating), water treatment grants, airport grants, pell grants, etc. In other words he is slashing jobs during a recession. Right after we gave Billionaires a tax break. (In fact the cuts will save us far less each year than the tax breaks cost us.)

Slashing domestic spending is the opposite of what should happen in a recession. Money going to poor people gets spent, helping the economy. Money going to Billionaires gets put in the bank. In fact the lower the tax on the rich, the more corporations pay them. When we had a super high income tax on the super rich, corporations actually reinvested their money in their company.

And of course, looking down the road, the cost of health care is the real drain on the economy and the largest factor increasing the deficit. Too bad the chamber of commerce (who Obama courted last week) spent tens of millions to advertise against a public option.

So Obama is taking from the poor and middle class and giving to the rich. And ensuring a slower recovery from the recession, making his re-election bid less likely. (OK, for those of you who worry about the deficit two things: the quickest way to get rid of it would be to get our economy going again so we have revenue, but if we must cut, how about cutting OVERSEAS spending - try closing our military bases in Japan - they don't want us there anyway, or Germany, or Bahrain, or Italy, or Bulgaria, or Iraq, or Afghanistan, or any of the 63 countries where we have military bases.)

But I said I was not going to blame Obama. Well he does not deserve all the blame. The Republicans want to slash far more of the budget. Obama actually increased spending in some areas like clean energy. The Republicans also want to make the tax cuts permenant and Obama has said this is a mistake.

So while I feel like I am sucking on a lemon when I hear what Obama is doing and the decisions he is making, if the Republicans get their way we will be eating shit.

I will take the lemon, but I hope enough Democrats are willing to suck it up rather than staying home on election day or we all just might have to choke down the latter.

Asmaa Mahfouz & the YouTube Video that Helped Spark the Egyptian Uprising

2011-02-09T08:12:00.000-08:00

This is inspiring, often we think one person cannot have a huge effect on the world, this woman proves that idea wrong. I also love the feeling of solidarity and peace that she conveys regarding the popular movement in Egypt. This is sure a much nicer form of regime change than "Shock and Awe".

State of the Onion - (it makes me cry)

2011-01-27T08:36:00.000-08:00

You are spared a long winded blog here for I do not have the time. But I gotta just weigh in on the lunacy of it all - it does make me want to cry.

So Obama , in his State of the Union address, laid out some lofty goals to help the US remain a world leader. Improve our education, invest in green energy and technologies, and spur innovation. Yes, exactly what we need, a new industrial revolution that will allow for an improved environment, and improved economy, and improved national security!

But wait, where is the money for all this gonna come from? Obama also said he wants to freeze domestic spending for 5 years. And of course the Republicans control the House of Representatives so what do they want to do? Well in the face of our largest budget deficit ever - massive spending cuts across the board.

The Federal Budget Office said we will have the largest deficit and the number one contributor to that - the renewal of the Bush tax cuts which Republicans INSISTED on. Tax cuts for Billionaires one day and then the next - oh we are so broke we need to cut spending on things like medical care for seniors and social security and ...how about more tax breaks for the oil industry. The Republicans talk about Americans 'tightening their belts' and 'watching their spending' so the government should do the same. First of all the top 1% are earning more money than ever before - there is no belt tightening for them. Second of all if everyone tightens their belts then the government better spend some money and get it out there.

The Republicans argue that government spending has never fostered innovation or helped the economy. That is ridiculous. They mentioned that our federal spending has not been so high since WWII. Wasn't the spending of WWII what finally shook us of the Great Depression - that is what they argue when they want to spend money on wars - 'its good for the economy'. Others argue that the economy was recovering before WWII, thanks to government investment here at home.

Austerity will only lead to a shrinking of the economy. DUH. Cuts will lay people off, increase the number of homeless, increase the number without medical care, these all become burdens on the system - costing more in the end. 'Obamacare" which Republicans want to repeal will REDUCE the deficit. Most budget cuts mean people lose their jobs, how does this help the economy recover?

Of course the Republicans DO NOT WANT THE ECONOMY TO RECOVER!!! A recovering economy will mean Obama gets reelected and a tanking or still stagnant economy may very well mean Republicans can take back the White House. Which is the only thing they want. Then they can further deregulate, cut taxes for the rich even more, and put people on the supreme court that will further entrench the rights of corporations to control this democracy or should I say Plutocracy.

The congressional Financial Crisis Inquiry determined that the recession could have been prevented and that is was caused by a failure of our government to regulate the banks and by risky and irresponsible actions by Wall Street. But of course the Republicans want less regulations and tax breaks for the bankers who are making hundreds of millions of dollars in profit while families lose their homes and small businesses go under.

I hope the American people see how much the next two years are going to suck thanks to the Republicans and get rid of them the next time around. For that to happen Obama has to stand up and take a stand for Democratic principles and not continue with this bipartisanship crap. The Republicans are going to fight Obama's agenda to the bitter end (we saw this in their UNANIMOUS vote to repeal 'Obamacare') Obama better stand up as an alternative to the Republicans or he will most likely be a one term President.

Well maybe it was a little long winded - medium winded - but once I get started you know how it goes. It feels good to get it off my chest so I can get back to educating these students to save the world.

During our current unit on Climate Change we had a nice discussion about the new Republican controlled House getting rid of the committee on Energy Security and Climate Change. Why if they did something like, that they must have good reason! So we looked at those reasons - and I let the students, of course, make up their own minds. Do they choose to believe the National Academy of Sciences, NOAA, and NASA or do they believe the Republican politicians, it is up to them to decide what they believe (and who they will vote for when they are old enough).

I am sure some of their parents loved that lesson. But hey when you have national politicians talking about the very subject you are studying in class, how can you not check out what they are saying.

The Tax Debate

2010-12-09T12:08:00.000-08:00

Another example of how crazy politics is in this country!!

The Republicans say they will block everything - unemployment extension, the START nuclear arms treaty with Russia, immigration reform, extension of tax cuts for the struggling middle class in a time of recession. And all because they insist on extending tax breaks for the wealthiest 2% and adding that money onto the deficit which they care to claim so much about. Warren Buffet himself said the rich have never had it so good. 75% of Americans are against these top tax cuts.

At the same time the Republicans are pushing to increase the deficit by prolonging the Bush tax cuts for those that don't need it, they are saying in 2012 they are going to blame Obama.

The President makes a back room deal with Republicans. In the video clip below he explains very logically why he had to compromise. (of course a compromise I would have respected would be to find a point between the $200,000 income the Democrats are using as a cap and the Republican position. How about tax breaks for those making a million dollars a year and less. That sounds like a compromise and hard to argue with.)

Obama said he does not want to put the economy at risk to score political points. One problem with not considering political points is that the Republicans are constantly considering this and if Obama chooses not to play the game, he may lose in 2012. And example of being outplayed on this compromise: The concessions he got from the Republicans all expire in a year, in order to prevent the economy from benefiting from them leading up to his re-election bid.

The craziness comes in now: The Republicans were willing to block everything until they got what they want, even though what they want goes against the majority opinion in this democracy. Obama compromises, which means giving the Republicans exactly what they want (and more - they also got a deal on the estate tax). Now the liberals in congress are saying they will stand their ground and stand with the American people and vote against a bill that includes tax cuts for the top 2%. (25% of the money from Obama's compromise goes to the top 1% according to the New York Times).

Now everyone is saying if the bill fails it will be the liberals' fault and the Democrats will be to blame for ruining the economy. So Obama, in his not so masterful political game-man-ship set the Democrats up. He has basically sided with the Republicans and is setting up the Democrats to look like the problem. He could have backed a bill that the Democrats supported and blamed the Republicans for its failure if they voted against it. Then after the Republicans were seen as the obstructionists they are he could have made a compromise. But instead he backed a bill that gave the Republicans what they want and set the Democrats up with a situation where they need to give in or be seen as the obstructionists.

Even if the ultimate bill is the same, his political strategy sucks. No matter how much good will he shows to the Republicans they will slit his throat come election time. Meanwhile by not standing up for the liberal and progressive base of his party he is making it difficult for them to win.

Clearly there are different opinions about strategy but from my point of view Obama's strategy is not so good.

Of course the crazy part of our political system is that strategy is so key. In a logical world Americans would see that the Republicans are fighting against the opinions and interests of the majority of Americans and that they say one thing and do the exact opposite (claim to be so concerned about the deficit but insist on unpopular and unaffordable tax cuts for the ones who are doing just fine).

And that they get away with this! When a reporter on NPR asked a Republican about the tax breaks for the wealthy he responded by saying they aren't tax cuts, he said that in fact the democrats are fighting for the largest tax increase in American history. And he went on to say that raising taxes on the job creators in a recession is bad policy and shows how incapable of running our government Democrats are. And the interviewer let that explanation stand. Never mind that more money in the pockets of the already super rich are not going to create jobs. It is going to go into the stock market, overseas investments, and offshore bank accounts.

Obummer

2010-12-08T09:28:00.000-08:00

So here is Obama's defense of his tax compromise. I whole heartedly disagree with the President. Of course it is obvious the Change he planned on bringing to the White House was not a change in policy, but a change in politics. He likes to compromise. This could be a good thing if the Republicans weren't out to destroy him and their policies weren't a continuation of what is causing our problems in the first place. The Republicans don't compromise, they hold hostage our government in order to get what they want for the ruling corporate class.

Obama is clear about what he thinks below, but I think before giving in he should force the Republicans to go on record. They should force the Republicans to stand up and filibuster what the vast majority of Americans want. After that give, with the message that we need to get rid of the Republicans to avoid further stunts.

It is what it is, but for me it is a major disappointment. I did not like Hilary during the Primaries because she was so ruthless and mean spirited but maybe she would have fought harder. The pit bull was not appealing against the golden retriever in the Primaries but perhaps she could have stood her ground against the Republicans.

Sen Bernie Sanders for President 2012

(interesting and sad side note: They are now saying that Obama's compromise included lowering the estate tax (benefiting the rich) will increase California's budget deficit by 2.7 billion dollars forcing even more dramatic cuts to education and other state spending. Thanks Obummer for working so well with the Republicans to destroy the working and middle class while protecting the wealthy.)

Bernie Sanders on Tax Cuts and war on middle class

2010-12-06T15:54:00.000-08:00

By far my favorite senator, favorite politician for that matter, is Bernie Sanders, Independent from Vermont. Here is a good speech about the Republican war on the middle class - he touches on taxes, national debt, trade, concentration of wealth, threat to social security, etc.
The first Video is from Rachael Maddow, she gives highlights from the speech (the second video) and interviews him.

The Speech:

Money Trickles Up and Austerity for All

2010-11-23T13:17:00.000-08:00

First, don't take it from me that we should raise taxes on the rich, listen to one of their own:

Warren Buffett: "I think that people at the high end, people like myself, should be paying a lot more in taxes. We have it better than we’ve ever had it ... The rich are always going to say that, you know, 'Just give us more money, and we'll go out and spend more, and then it will all trickle down to the rest of you.’ But that has not worked the last 10 years, and I hope the American public is catching on."
So it should not surprise you that the opposite of what the Republicans say is true, it is the rule, not the exception. The great "Trickle Down Effect". In the past 40 years the taxes for the super wealthy in this country have been slashed dramatically - Reagan took them from around 70% down to around 30%. The idea, as Buffet said, you give rich people money, they spend it, it ends up trickling down to everyone else.
In reality, money trickles up. Look at the wealth that is accumulated in monarchies, in churches, in Swiss bank accounts. Most people I know spend all the money they earn. Poor people spend all their money on life necessities. Middle class people spend all their money on slightly higher quality necessities and some luxuries like cars, TVs, iPods, travel, mechanics, doctors, etc. There is all this money flowing through the economy but it stops flowing and collects in large pools - the bank accounts of the corporate CEO class of this nation. Look at Meg Whitman - she made Billions of dollars being CEO of e-bay. She has so much extra money that tricked up to her that she blew $140 million trying to become governor of a state that was too smart to elect her.

CEOs make hundreds of millions of dollars a year! This is thousands of times what I make as a teacher in the highest paying school around. Is what they do for our country thousands of times more valuable than what I do? Why should all this wealth be allowed to trickle up into there hands?

Warren Buffet says it: "We have it better than we’ve ever had it". The CEOs of the wall street banks that needed taxpayer bailouts - those CEOs are making record salaries - during a recession which has record unempl0yment (depression levels in some states) , increasing families losing their homes, record demand for food at food banks and shelters. The CEOs of health insurance companies are making hundreds of millions of dollars a year in profit - which they accumulate in their bank accounts - while American families are going bankrupt and even dying because they can't afford the cost of medical care or insurance.
The number of billionaires in this country and the world is soaring, even now during the recession - the US has I think around 1,400 billionaires now compared to I think about 40, 30 years ago. Hell the guy who created Facebook (actually the guy who stole the idea of Facebook) is worth four billion dollars ans is the youngest billionaire in the world.
Money trickles up and we are seeing the fasted consolidation of wealth the world has ever seen. Let people get rich - If you take half of Zuckerberg's 4 billion he will still be doing alright, and maybe our government could put it towards anti online bullying education which things like Facebook have made a sad reality of this new digital age.
I hear so much about Austerity measures! Cut government spending - the Republicans are going to push for that. The IMF is reaming Ireland, telling them to cut unemployment and minimum wage.
Balance the books on the backs of the poor and working class - that is what is happening, while the rich have never had it better. I say lets at the very least have Austerity for ALL, if we need austerity. Austerity seems like a smart idea when you have over spent. But is it the best way to get out of a recession?
Take away minimum wage, and other things that help the poorest people, cut spending and lay off government workers, how does that help us get out of the recession?
End of rant

Danny's post election thoughts: Obama has two choices

2010-11-04T09:46:00.000-07:00

OK the 2010 midterm elections are over and the dust has settled. I think they were very interesting and are perfect for clarifying where this country is and where it might go from here.

The republicans will try to prevent Obama from being re-elected in two years and Obama will either continue trying to work with them, or he will stand up firmly against them. The success of the Democrats in 2012, in my opinion, depends on which he chooses to do.

First I am fairly relieved since Meg Whitman and Carli Fiorina lost in California. They were just awful. (I actually know a lot of first hand info about Meg that I cannot tell you) But self funded corporate CEO's are not the ones we want running our government regardless.

I am most sad that Russ Feingold, Alan Greyson, and some other progressives lost their jobs. Russ Feingold fought in the senate for the people and against big government (what the Tea Party that ousted him claim to care about). He was the only one who voted against the patriot act, he voted against the bank bailouts, against NAFTA and every free trade agreement, authored political finance reform, etc. He was a truly independent (going against the Democratic establishment often) progressive. Sad to see him go to a corporatist millionaire.

Of course the Citizens United case has played out with the most expensive election in history!

So in a bad economy what always happens happened, the party in Power lost. In fact the last three elections have seen the party in charge lose. People are not happy with the economy or our government. The economy is bad because we deregulated the banks and lowered taxes on the wealthy. Just like when we did this before the great depression, it led to speculative bubbles with all that money the wealthy were playing with. The bubble burst, the economy collapsed, the banks and wealthy who caused it have actually made record profits during the recession. Obama and his government catered much more to wall street than they did main street. The Republicans of course did everything they could to prevent the economic recovery so they could win. For instance making sure the the stimulus was too small to make a big difference.

Obama tried to compromise with the Republicans and placate wall street rather than take on the Republicans and fight for the people. The horrible health care bill is an example. Obama took the public option (which 60% of Americans according to USA Today STILL SUPPORT) off the table. The weak stimulus another. The lack of a climate change bill another.

Now John Boener, the new speaker of the House, says he will repeal the health care bill because it will bankrupt the country and will push for extending tax cuts for the rich. (Of course this is crazy as the tax cuts will add to our debt while the health care bill is actually projected to lower it - but we know the Republicans don't play with the facts)

Republicans have also said now their number one goal: make sure Obama does not get re-elected in two years. Carl Rove has promised to continue running secretly funded attack ads nonstop even after the election to turn public opinion against the Democrats. Citizens United is a flood gate that has been opened that could wash away our democracy - this is scary stuff. Imagine providing the evil genius Carl Rove with UNLIMITED SECRET CORPORATE MONEY with which to wage the biggest advertising war the world has ever seen - and all to the detriment of our democracy)

Obama and the Democrats have two choices: work with the Republicans, which will not win over Republican votes and will not motivate the Democratic base, leading to a sure loss of the white house and senate in two years.

or stand up and fight against the Republican agenda. This will be a winning strategy as the majority of the people actually want a public option, they want the banks to be regulated, they want foreclosures to stop, they want job creating stimulus bills, they want to take action on climate change. The people will be on the side of the Democrats if they fight for them and against the corporate interests. This was shown in the two million people who went to the Mall to see Obama sworn in, in the young people who outvoted old people for the first time when they thought Obama was their guy. (Young people failed to vote in large numbers this time)

Fighting Washington is the only way Obama will win in two years. Becoming Washington he will lose.

Now I must say that we cannot blame Obama or expect him to act on his own. He never said he was a progressive. He talked of Change and people projected what they thought that meant. I never expected him to be progressive. But for most people, change meant fighting for the people and not the corporations. Unfortunately it seems change for Obama meant ending the divisive politics and trying to be a uniter, a compromiser. Well that has not solved the countries problems and did not help him politically either.

And we the people need to be loud and clear with what we want. We need to start organizing and calling the White House TODAY. Tell him to let the Republicans repeal the lousy health care bill and then fight to replace it with Medicare for anyone who wants it. Tell him to fight against the tax cuts for the rich in a time when our economy is so bad (he even has Alan Greenspan on his side). Tell him to push hard for green stimulus that will get people back to work and reduce out carbon emissions. Tell him to let the Republicans kill Cap and trade and instead fight for a carbon fee that will be returned in dividend checks to EVERY AMERICAN.

Obama will not chose this fight unless a loud movement of people PUSH HIM INTO THE RING. We need a Green Tea Party (unfortunately we are not backed by toms of money and the corporate media like the (White) Tea Party but we do have the true numbers on our side!

If Obama chooses these fights and makes the case for each one plane and clear and drill it home then he will reignite the passion that got him elected. At the same time when the Republicans fight him he needs to point out over and over again that it is the Republicans who are blocking progress, fighting for the corporations, and that in 2012 we need to give them the boot so we can actually get these things done.

Obama, the choice is yours, do you want to move out of your house in two years?

a quick election rant: Republicans are amazing

2010-10-31T21:45:00.000-07:00

Regardless of what your political views you must agree that the Republicans are incredible.

They are so good at politics it is impressive. It is absolutely incredible how they can spin anything to convince people to vote for them. It doesn't matter what they say, they know how to say it in a way that makes them sound great and the Democrats sound like the bad guys. They are the masters at framing. And as good as they are at it, the Democrats suck to an equal extent.

Republicans actually run on the basis that government is bad. They say, the government can't do anything right so let us be in charge of it. That is a crazy way to sell yourself for a job. Also just look at the last 10 years. They were in charge, they messed things up, the Democrats tried to fix it, the Republicans tried to prevent them from fixing anything, and now not only are the Republicans blaming the Democrats but they are running by saying they will do the very same things that caused our problems: more deregulation and tax cuts.

And the Republicans don't need the truth. They label Obama a socialist. Boy, those of us on the left wish he was a socialist rather than the corporatist he is turning out to be.

Look at Sharon Angle. She is running on repealing the medical reform act and making tax cuts permanent. And she is expected to win, beating Harry Reid. She is very extreme in her views including the fact she thinks abortion should be illegal for women who have been raped (as do 79 Republican candidates running for office). She really does not even seem very bright.

Both her campaign slogans are perfect examples of the Republican spin machine. The last election medical reform was a hot topic. Most agreed the system needed fixing. The democrats made it a priority. The Republicans fought reform during the entire process. To win their support the Democrats watered down the reform and let the Republicans write much of the legislation in hopes they would support it. In the end the bill was nearly identical to what the Republican party proposed a decade ago as an alternative to then first lady Hillary Clinton's plan. Now the health care bill did not make liberals happy either, with no public option or single payer system to address the cost of health insurance. But the fact is the Democrats tried to fix a major problem for this country. The Republicans labeled it a government take over (preposterous as they are requiring everyone to buy insurance from private companies) and are running on repealing it. The Democrats should be able to boast they worked hard to pass health care reform. But since the Republican spin machine labeled it as a loser, the only democrats that mention it are the ones who claim they were against it.

Angle's call to make tax cuts permanent. Well 98% of Americans will have their tax cuts continued by the Democrats. The fact is though, we are running a huge federal budget deficit so cutting taxes adds to that. The top 2% tax cut amounted to the majority (I forget the exact numbers) of the money lost. If we are to be fiscally responsible, we cannot afford the tax cuts for the rich. Even Alan Greenspan agrees with this. Arguably we cannot afford any of the tax cuts but as many people are struggling right now one can understand extending them for 98% of the people. Obama actually gave everyone tax cuts in the stimulus bill but no one really knew it because they followed economists' advice and gave the money back is small increments in our pay checks. Of course the Republicans still say Obama raised taxes.

So really Sharron Angle is saying 'vote for me, I will fight against the reform everyone wanted and worked hard to pass and I will fight to lower the taxes for the top 2% to the detriment of our economy. And while I am there I will try to reverse Row v Wade, get rid of public education, and prevent any clean energy legislation that tries to address that global warming myth.'

Republicans also run on privatizing social security. This is absurd. Social security actually pays for itself, this is not something that is going to help our deficit.

Republicans also run on the claim that Global Climate change is a myth! They put this in their ads. Now the majority of the world is very concerned about the possibility of human driven climate change and most of the world is united in trying to prevent it. Science is clear enough that we must at least admit it is a possibility. Many experts actually say, without immediate action, our global life support system will face catastrophic collapse in 30 years. Now even if you chose not to believe these doomsday predictions, it seems like we should take actions just in case they are right! Think about terrorism. We do not know there will be an attack, yet no one argues we should do nothing to try and prevent one. In fact that was the logic behind going into Afghanistan 8 years and many lives and dollars ago. We are the only nation on Earth where a large percentage of people think climate change is a myth. The Republican spin machine in full effect.

I need to get back to work so I won't get into why this is the case. Certainly it is multifaceted. The Republicans are in constant campaign/spin mode, they have the support of an often misleading mainstream media, at the very least a media that does not get into the fact of the issues, they have evil geniuses like Carl Rove on their side, and by taking the side that 'government is bad' it is easier for them to prevent government from working and proving themselves right, rather than try to make it work, which would prove them wrong.

privatization vs socialism

2010-10-05T10:45:00.000-07:00

Well there is all this spin that Socialism is a bad thing coming from the right in this country. The conservatives want to privatize everything - education, health care, social security, even the fire department.

Progressives think many services should be socialized and provided by our government and funded through taxes - we already have socialized military, police departments, fire departments, education etc. Progressives believe we should also have socialized medicine in addition.

Recently Mike Huckebee at a conservative convention likened people with pre-existing conditions to houses that already burned down, suggesting insurance companies should not have to insure them. That is the mentality of privatized, for profit services.

We have all heard of people being denied treatment because they have no health insurance. Well as budgets get slashed throughout this country services we once took for granted (like the fire department) are being forced to privatize or cut services and charge subscription fees (our "public" school has to ask families to give money to buy things like paper). So like health care and higher education, if you can't afford to pay for it, you don't get it.

Here is a story of what it looks like in this conservative world:

Tennessee Firefighters Watch House Burn Down; Owners Didn’t Pay Subscription Fee

Oct 3 2010 Posted in U.S. News by Dan Evon with View Comments

In certain parts of Tennessee, there is a $75 subscription fee for firefighter services. Gene and Paulette Cranick, of South Fulton, Tennessee, learned the hard way that the firefighters in Tennessee are not joking about the subscription fee.

A group of firemen arrived to an emergency call, then watched the Cranick’s house burn down, after they were ordered not to put out the fire because of an unpaid subscription fee.

When the fire spread toward a neighbor’s house, the firefighters did step in. The neighbor, of course, paid the subscription fee.

Mr. Cranick, the owner of the house, said:

“I thought they’d come out and put it out, even if you hadn’t paid your $75, but I was wrong.”

The Telegraph reports that the Cranick’s live in a rural part of Tennessee, out of the firefighters typical designated area. The people who live in South Fulton, Tennessee, can pay a $75 fee to have their house protected by firefighters, but it is not a mandatory fee.

Timothy Cranick, the owner’s son, was arrested shortly after his parents house burned down for punching the fire chief.

Read The Full Story: Tennessee Firefighters Watch House Burn Down; Owners Didn’t Pay Subscription Fee – Indyposted

Change the Filibuster!

2010-10-01T10:53:00.000-07:00

The Republicans are using the threat of a filibuster to block EVERYTHING the Democrats try to do. Stop the government and then blame those in charge. We take it for granted now that the Democrats need 60 votes to get anything passed. That was not the case before! We constantly hear about this 60 votes needed. That is because it takes 60 votes to break a filibuster and the Republicans block everything from getting out of debate and being put up for an up or down vote.

A simple majority is all it takes to pass a bill. The Republicans, when they were in charge, bullied the Democrats into up or down votes on everything - even extreme things like the appointment of Samuel Alito to the supreme court.

Just yesterday four corporate democrats and all the Republicans used the threat of filibuster to stop a bill that would have taxed corporations that ship jobs overseas and given tax credits to companies that create jobs in America. A needed solution for our unemployment problem.

Blocked by the filibuster - would have passed without it.

The filibuster rules must change - tell your elected officials.

essential action for our Democracy

2010-09-27T09:37:00.000-07:00

Money influencing our elections is the number one problem in this country, here is one step to fixing that problem...

I am fired up !!!!!

2010-09-24T09:53:00.000-07:00

Well the Republicans are good at two things: Politics and getting me fired up.

It is absolutely incredible they can get away with the transparent lies that they do. I am always torn between blaming the American people - why can't everyone see through the BS - and blaming the media for not exposing the Republicans every day for what they are. (although I guess I should hold off judgment as this just happened. Maybe the media will call them on it and maybe the voters will not be tricked.)

So yesterday the Republicans came out with their "Pledge to America - a new governing agenda". Of course there is nothing new about it. They propose the same deregulation that ruined our economy, the same tax cuts that caused our deficit, and the same repeal of things like environmental and medical reforms. It is worth looking at if nothing else to laugh at their willingness to twist the truth.

The guy who wrote it, Brian Wilde, was a lobbyist for Exxon, AIG, and big Pharma. So no wonder the proposals amount to more deregulation of corporations and fewer taxes for those consolidating America's wealth in their private offshore accounts.

Of course they unveil it in a small business and say they are the party that "listens to the common man" and "fights for small businesses". The SAME DAY they block the Democrats from passing a bill to help small businesses!!! Their excuse was that they don't want new spending. At the same time they want to extend the tax cuts to the top 2%.

In it they say about the Democrats: "An unchecked executive, a compliant legislature and an overreaching judiciary have combined to thwart the will of the people and overturn their votes and their values," Now let's remember that Cheney and his ilk are the ones who have fought for the Unitary Executive since the days of Nixon and Bush pushed the unchecked executive to new extremes. No legislature is more compliant (to the will of corporate America) than one controlled by Republicans. And overreaching Judiciary - look at the Citizens United case! Extreme right wing supreme court justices overturning decades of precident to promote their corporate agenda.

It also says: "An arrogant and out-of-touch government of self-appointed elites makes decisions, issues mandates, and enacts laws without accepting or requesting the input of the many," I just have to laugh at this. I am pissed that Obama actually does request the input of the many Republicans. The Republicans when in charge would hold hearings but keep the room numbers secret so the Democratic lawmakers did not know where to go to be involved. Bush said "I don't care about public opinion". In fact when they want a war they figure out how to SHAPE public opinion - like they did with health care. And they do have a point - when most of the country wanted to debate the public option the democrats took it off the table, when much of the country wanted the crimes of the Bush Regime investigated they took if off the table, when most of the country is suffering from the economy they continue to listen to Wall Street. Of course on all these issues the Republicans are further on the wrong side!!!

It says: "We will help the economy by permanently stopping all tax increases currently scheduled to take effect Jan. 1, 2011," so maybe they really don't care about the deficit?

They say the Democrats are beholden to "special interest groups". In fact this week the Republicans once again blocked an attempt by the Democrats to pass a campaign disclosure bill that would require special interest groups - from corporations to labor unions - to disclose to what campaigns they give money. This is an essential law after the activist right wing supreme court made their Citizens' United ruling that says corporations can give UNLIMITED money to political campaigns. (of course this is playing out in key elections this fall where super fringe candidates that say things like "public education is child abuse and the public education system needs to be abolished" are being funded with unlimited money to beat out long standing progressive Democrats.)

They say that under the Democrats the "government is too big and spends too much", while the Bush administration expanded the federal government more than any president since World War II with his creation of the Department of Homeland Security and spent money on costly wars that he did not even put in the budget. Obama's spending has been an attempt to get this country out of a Republican recession and the Democrats have tried at every opportunity to PAY FOR THEIR SPENDING by closing corporate tax loopholes that the Republicans created that let corporations like Exxon make $40 billion dollars and not only not pay any US taxes but to receive a tax credit!

The Republicans announced that they want to stimulate job growth by extending the tax cuts and at the same time they block job creating bills such as the climate bill which would have created 2 million jobs and they even say if they win this November they will repeal the stimulus which has created jobs and prevented the loss of many other jobs.

The top 2% received 66% of the money from the Bush tax cuts. Even Alan Greenspan says we should not renew them. The wealthy are getting more wealthy in this country while the middle class and poor are having a harder and harder time - foreclosures are still happening at an increasing rate! The Republicans say they listen to the common man yet they want to cut government programs to help the common man.

If only George Orwell could live to see this...

Voter Suppression Plans Between Republican Party of Wisconsin, Americans for Prosperity, Tea Party Groups

2010-09-22T10:52:00.000-07:00

One Wisconsin Now Exposes Voter Suppression Plans Between Republican Party of Wisconsin, Americans for Prosperity, Tea Party Groups

By Robert Doeckel on September 20, 2010 12:50 PM

2 Comments | Tell a friend | Link to Entry

Coordination on Voter Caging, Targeting Minorities, College Students Outlined in Documents, Tea Party Meeting Recording

A coordinated plot by the Republican Party of Wisconsin, Americans for Prosperity-Wisconsin and organizations in the so-called Tea Party movement targeting minority voters and college students in a possibly illegal "voter caging" effort for voter suppression has been uncovered in evidence we have obtained.

Based on what we have heard, the Republican Party of Wisconsin, the Americans for Prosperity-Wisconsin and leading Tea Party organizations are in collusion in an effort to suppress the ability of minorities and university students in Wisconsin to exercise their right to vote this November. We will be providing all of the evidence we have received on this wrongdoing to federal and state authorities so that they can investigate to ensure justice and democracy prevail."

One Wisconsin Now has filed formal requests for investigation with the U.S. Attorney's Office, as well as the Wisconsin Attorney General's Election Integrity Task Force and the Government Accountability Board demanding a full investigation to ensure the right to vote is not stolen by these plans.

The non-partisan Brennan Center for Justice outlines the process of voter caging:

Voter caging is the practice of sending mail to addresses on the voter rolls, compiling a list of the mail that is returned undelivered, and using that list to purge or challenge voters registrations on the grounds that the voters on the list do not legally reside at their registered addresses. Supporters of voter caging defend the practice as a means of preventing votes cast by ineligible voters. Voter caging, however, is notoriously unreliable. If it is treated (unjustifiably) as the sole basis for determining that a voter is ineligible or does not live at the address at which he or she registered, it can lead to the unwarranted purge or challenge of eligible voters. ...Moreover, the practice has often been targeted at minority voters, making the effects even more pernicious. [Brennan Center, "A Guide to Voter Caging," 6/29/07]

One Wisconsin Now obtained an audio recording it has verified as authentic from a June 12, 2010 meeting between the leaders of the state's Tea Party movement, led by Tim Dake, head of the GrandSons of Liberty. Dake serves as a regular spokesperson for Wisconsin's Tea Party organizations and is widely viewed as the movement's Wisconsin leader. The full audio, available at One Wisconsin Now's voter protection website, www.SaveWisconsinsVote2010.org, details the plans for a coordinated voter suppression efforts, which is anchored in challenging voter eligibility on Election Day this November 2.

THE PLOT
According to the statements made on the recordings, Dake lays out the plans, detailing contact between himself and Reince Preibus, the Republican Party of Wisconsin Chair and Mark Block, state director of Americans for Prosperity-Wisconsin:

• The Republican Party of Wisconsin will use its "Voter Vault" state-wide voter file to compile a list of minority and student voters in targeted Wisconsin communities.

• Americans for Prosperity will use this list to send mail to these voters indicating the voter must call and confirm their registration information, and telling them if they do not call the number provided they could be removed from the voter lists.

• The Tea Party organizations will recruit and place individuals as official poll workers in selected municipalities in order to be able to make the challenges as official poll workers.

• On Election Day, these organizations will then "make use" of any postcards that are returned as undeliverable to challenge voters at the polls, utilizing law enforcement, as well as attorneys trained and provided by the RPW, to support their challenges.

According to the recordings, Dake told the assembled Tea Party members he leads:

So, what we're hoping is that the various groups in the coalition plus Americans for Prosperity and Mark Block, who has been in on this, and the Republican Party, and this is coming all the way from the top: Reince Priebus has said, "We're in." And there's a reason why these guys are volunteering to work with us. They have access to what they call Voter Vault, you know the records of voting. They can go in there and look for lapsed voters. They can go in and compare lists of voters and say, "Oh look at this. This person is registered in this county, this county, this county, and this county." And do something about this. So we're talking about a broad based support behind this idea. What they're offering is training.

Dake continues in the recording to outline the plan:

[RPW is] offering to do the training; it's not going to cost anything, but what we're looking at is statewide getting our groups involved, getting people, like my group has a 2,700 person email list. We want to hit that and see how many of these people we can get involved in this one project. The idea being at some point to go in on September 14 and November 2 and have these people involved and doing poll watching and checking. There are some consultants that have offered to step up, "We're Watching" is stepping up; attorneys from the Republican Party.

Later in his presentation, Dake adds:

Okay, poll watchers what you can do is you can call in a lawyer. The Republican Party, this is one of the things they're offering, they're saying they'll have their lawyers standing by so that if you call, let's say you're poll watching in say Hales Corners and you see something really fraudulent, they will send a lawyer out right away and be able to say, "Here's the deal, here's the law, this is what we expect." Bring the police in and make your complaint that sort of thing. So, we've got that. You can challenge voters through the precinct captains. This is one of the things they will teach you how to do and anybody can challenge a voter. And since the voter law did not get passed this year that could hit you with $100,000 and three years for unsuccessfully challenging a voter, we can still do this.

Dake is interrupted at this point by an unidentified coalition member who shouts, "Hallelujah." Dake adds, "Yes, everybody gets to take credit for that." He goes on to outline Americans for Prosperity-Wisconsin's role and how to target law enforcement:

So we're talking about AFP is willing to fund doing a mass mailing to registered voters on this, about getting them involved with this, making sure that their information is current, because people periodically need to go back and check. I found, before we bought the house we lived in. Four years ago I lived in a brand new condo, the first people to live in it. I went to vote and found twelve people registered at my address. My wife and I are the only people to have lived there. Yet, there were twelve people registered to vote. I couldn't believe it. They said, "Wow, you must have a big family." And I'm looking at names and going, "No, there's nobody named 'Nguyen' and 'Din' and that sort of thing in my family." So that's the kind of thing we need to clean up and people need to be aware of. Go in and check who else is registered at your place and ask to have them tossed off. Work with the media on this and district attorneys. Try to get them involved early and fired up about this and say look, "We know you're shorthanded, we're hands, we're boots on the ground. We will help you, just bring the weight of the law behind us." One of the things we're going to do is take these addresses that people give and we want to send out a postcard that says, "You need to call and confirm this. And if you haven't called, well then it could get tossed out." We're also looking for when you send these cards out is they'll come back if it is an undeliverable address.

THE QUOTES: Among some of the discussion also captured on the audio:

"[Y]ou run into the racial thing. You have people screaming, 'Oh, you're denying the minorities the right to vote.' No., we're denying their right to vote multiple times." [Tim Dake, GrandSons of Liberty]

"Work with the media on this and the district attorneys. Try to get them involved early and fired up about this and say look, 'We know you're shorthanded, we're hands, we're boots on the ground. We will help you, just bring the weight of the law behind us." [Tim Dake, GrandSons of Liberty]

"I was a poll watcher from 2000 to 2006 and if you've got a university in your county, or your city, students will come down in droves and then they will all vouch for each other. I had this one kid come in five times with five separate groups of people and this person brings in students, they're usually from Minnesota or wherever up by Eau Claire, and you go, 'Do you live here?' 'Yes.' 'Well do you have anything that shows your address?' 'No.' Then that one student says, 'I vouch for her, I vouch for him.' And they all vote. [Shane McVey, Eau Claire Tea Party]

"This is apparently a very effective deterrent, just having people standing there. Poll watching tends to discourage people when they know someone is looking." [Tim Dake, GrandSons of Liberty]

"It's just having people who have the courage and conviction because in our society we have been 'wussified'.... [T]hey try to claim intimidation and they'll bring a whole bunch of people. If you do challenge a vote like three people will surround you and they'll all start getting in your face and threatening you with legal action and all that stuff. You just have to be strong willed and be able to take that stuff." [Shane McVey, Eau Claire Tea Party]

THE REQUEST FOR INVESTIGATION

The possible illegality of the RPW-AFP-WI-Tea Party plot that One Wisconsin Now lays out in the requests for investigation to law enforcement officials assert:

• Federal law prohibits racially targeted caging operations. Statements made during the June 12 meeting make clear that race is a motivating factor in the planned caging and challenge effort. Any efforts to deter qualified electors from voting based on their race must be immediately investigated and, if substantiated, stopped. [42 U.S.C. §§ 1973(a); 1973gg]

• The organizations' Election Day plans could put the state at possible risk of violating federal law. Federal law makes clear that elector challenges cannot be based solely on returned mail. The organizations' plans to recruit individuals to become poll workers in order to conduct challenges based on the returned mail would result in individuals acting unlawfully under color of state law. [42 U.S.C. § 1973gg; Tiryak v. Jordan, 472 F. Supp. 822, 824 (E.D. PA 1979)]

• Federal law also makes clear that private actors are similarly prohibited from challenging voters based solely on undelivered mail. Even if a challenge comes from a volunteer election observer, the challenge is unlawful if it is based on the voter's failure to respond to the mailing. Any challenge to an elector's eligibility based on such unreliable grounds is an abuse of the right to challenge and violates state and federal law, subjecting the challenger to removal and other sanctions. [42 U.S.C. § 1973gg]

• Disturbingly, the mail program described by the Tea Party members will contain false and misleading information. The Tea Party plans to tell certain voters that their name may be removed if they fail to call the telephone number provided. It would be illegal to remove a voter from the statewide database based on this reason. [42 U.S.C. § 1973gg]

• The deceptive nature of the planned mailing is particularly troubling because the mailing described would almost certainly would appear to be an official governmental mailing. For the same reasons that it is unlawful to use official attire to challenge a voter at the polls on Election Day, it is unlawful to send a mailing that appears to be an official action of the governmental. [18 U.S.C. § 242; 42 U.S.C. § 1973i(b)]

Jon Stewart vs Stephen Colbert at the National Mall 10/30/10

2010-09-20T15:56:00.000-07:00

OK,
This is super funny, as a parody of the Glenn Beck rally and as an attempt to have real influence on the political discourse: dueling rallies on the National Mall: Jon Stewart vs Stephen Colbert.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c

Rally to Restore Sanity

www.thedailyshow.com

Daily Show Full Episodes

Political Humor

Tea Party

The Colbert Report

Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c

March to Keep Fear Alive Announcement

www.colbertnation.com

Colbert Report Full Episodes

2010 Election

Fox News

Elizabeth Warren, voice of reason

2010-09-17T10:04:00.000-07:00

Elizabeth Warren's Greatest Hits from MoveOn.org Official Channel on Vimeo.

Top Five Things You Should Know About Elizabeth Warren (from Moveon.org)

1. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was her idea. Here's why she thinks this agency is so critical: "It is impossible to buy a toaster that has a one-in-five chance of bursting into flames and burning down your house. But it is possible to refinance your home with a mortgage that has the same one-in-five chance of putting your family out on the street."1

2. The Republicans are so scared of her, they tried to pass a law blocking her from leading the agency. Republicans in Congress and the big Wall Street banks have always been against Warren leading the new consumer agency. Republicans even offered an amendment that was widely understood as designed to block Warren. That amendment failed.2

3. She is one of the most prominent, successful and fierce female lawyers in America. Coming from working-class roots, she graduated from high school as a debate star at 16. She finished law school when she was nine months pregnant. And she has repeatedly been named one of the fifty most influential female lawyers by the National Law Journal and was twice nominated as one of Time Magazines 100 Most Influential People (among other honors).3

4. She spoke truth to power about the failed foreclosure program. The Home Affordability Modification Program was supposed to save homeowners from losing their homes but has left many deeper in debt than they were before. Warren used her position on the Congressional Oversight panel to bring the voices of these disaffected homeowners right to the decision makers in the administration and demand accountability.4

5. She may have actual superpowers. She once calmed the entire crowd of an NBA game with her encyclopedic basketball knowledge. She explained the financial meltdown so clearly to Jon Stewart he said it made him "want to make out with" her. And there's a viral rap video about her.5
Sources:
1. "Making Credit Safer: The Case for Regulation," Harvard Magazine, June 2008
http://harvardmagazine.com/2008/05/making-credit-safer-html

2. "GOP Tried To Block Elizabeth Warren From Heading Agency She Proposed," Huffington Post, October 27, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=90368

3. Elizabeth Warren Wikipedia Entry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Warren

4. "Elizabeth Warren is Bostonian of the Year," The Boston Globe, December 20, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=90369

5. "How HAMP Makes Elizabeth Warren The Only Choice For Consumer Protection," The New Deal 2.0, July 22, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=90370

Got a New Sheriff, Main Street Brigade
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6W0vCgMRX0o

"Elizabeth Warren is Bostonian of the Year," The Boston Globe, December 20, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=90369

"Jon Stewart to Elizabeth Warren: Let's Make Out," Talking Points Memo, January 27, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=90371

Make sure your friends have seen this:
Facebook Twitter Email

perfect hypocrisy and another quick action to take

2010-09-15T15:02:00.000-07:00

So this is just so perfect.

The Republicans in congress, many times now, have held up extending the unemployment benefits for those who lost their jobs during this recession saying that they will not vote for this unless the Democrats pay for it by cutting money somewhere else. The argument is that they care so much about the deficit that they cannot support irresponsible spending.

Now Democrats are trying to renew the Bush tax cuts, which are about to expire, for 98% of Americans - all those except the top 2% of money makers. The Republicans say they will refuse to vote for the renewal of any tax cuts unless the top 2% also got their tax cuts renewed. Their argument is that the more money that is in private hand the faster our economic recovery will be.

So they fight against money going into the hands of the unemployed who need to SPEND the money on food, mortgages, health insurance, etc and fight for money going into the hands of the most wealthy in the nation. This is the group of people least likely to spend the money and most likely to save it.

Perfect hypocrisy and a perfect illustration of who the Republican party is fighting for and against.

The Republican s' plan to renew tax cuts for everyone is estimated to increase the deficit by over $4 trillion, while the Democrats' plan to renew them for everyone but the top two percent will only increase the deficit by $1.5 trillion - a difference of around $2.5 trillion. Big difference.

It is also interesting to note that the Bush tax cuts are expiring because the Republicans used tricks to get them passed that bypassed the normal legislative process and kept the money from showing up officially on the budget deficit. While cutting taxes the Republicans increased spending, started expensive wars, expanded government (Department of Homeland Security), pushed through trillions of dollars worth of corporate tax loop holes and then NOW they use the deficit as an excuse to cut spending on programs that help low income and middle class folks.

So the quick action - call the White House and Harry Reid and tell them to stand firm in not renewing the tax cuts for the top 2% during this economically difficult time. If Republicans want fiscal responsibility then give it to them! Also tell them to be stronger on closing corporate tax loop holes to give us the money we need to create more jobs in this country and to help those who need to get back on their feet.

White House comment line: 202-456-1111

Harry Reid's number in Washington: 202-224-3542

Skateboarder saves Qur'an: "Dude, you have no Qur'an"

2010-09-13T21:59:00.000-07:00

Ok, I heard this story on the radio today and had to check it out. I just watched the video again before going to bed - it is pretty classic.

The story is a 23 year old skateboarder saves Qur'an from burning.

He snatched it off the bar-b-que where is was doused with kerosene, ready to be lit, and told the religious nut case who was gonna burn it "Dude, you have no Qur'an" then ran off.

I guess not only is skateboarding not a crime, skateboarders stop crimes

click here to watch video.

Democracy is not a spectator's sport: take easy action now!

2010-09-10T12:59:00.000-07:00

Don't just sit by and watch your Democracy as if it was a bad TV show. Take a few minutes to participate in it!

It is time to contact Obama and other Democratic leaders to get them fired up to take on the Republicans before the mid-term elections. You can call Obama at: 202-456-1111 to leave a comment and you can email him by clicking here.

This is what I said when I called:

"This is Obama's last chance to energize the Democratic base and get them to the polls by truly standing up to the Republicans and the corporations they represent. Obama was elected by a wave of popular support and we need him to lead like a populist leader. The Republicans will lie and obstruct to cause the Democrats to look bad and the Democrats need to go on the offensive and not let the Republicans frame the debate."

and because I prefer to be more wordy, this is what I emailed to the White House: (click here to email the White House)

"Obama, it is your last chance to fight for the people who elected you! You must stand up now against the Republicans and corporations and do so with action, not just words.

I worked hard to get you elected. I hit the pavement and my wallet in your support. It is clear you have tried to lead this country in a bipartisan manner, which I respect in principle. However the Republicans and Conservatives who have created the problems we now face have only one goal in mind and that is the defeat of the Democrats. They are willing to lie and obstruct to prevent our government from solving the problems we face in order to get elected. An odd strategy that seems to be working.

In your centrist governing style you have failed to make changes that your base feel are important. On the economy, health care, the wars, climate change, you name it, where you have gotten laws passed they are so watered down that many do not see them as much change at all. The democratic base is not fired up by your actions and this could prove devastating in the upcoming elections both for the Democrats and our country.

You need to take on the Republicans and the corporations for which they stand. If you do, you will have powerful influences against you but you will have the majority of the American people at your back. It is your last chance to stand up and fight hard for the working majority in this country - you were elected under a wave of popular support, now you need to govern like a true populist, or I fear you may not be governing for long."

the upcoming (extremely important) elections

2010-09-07T15:43:00.000-07:00

Lots of news has been on my mind lately but I have not had time to write about it. I am also trying not to just bombard people with bad news (although we should be aware of what is happening) and rather write about positive things or at least areas where action is needed and possible.

Well voting is one of the most important things each of us can do to have an impact on the country and world in which we live. So I just want everyone to get excited about participating in the upcoming elections and to spread the word that people must get out and vote. This is an EXTREMELY important election.

Now I know excitement for voting is up for those energized by the fact we have Democrats in the Whitehouse and in the majority in congress. Unfortunately for the Democrats (and our country and world) those folks who are energized are the ones who are on the right side of the political spectrum.

The Democrats have been governing from the corporate middle - trying to appease corporate interests and gain Republican support - while at the same time trying to tackle some huge problems - health care, wars, recessions, climate change, etc. This has not gained them support from the right as the Republicans do everything to make the Democrats fail, knowing that if the government fails, Dems will be blamed, and the Republicans will have a better chance in fall elections. Proving that the Republicans are great at winning elections and horrible at governing.

A perfect example of this was the health care bill. The bill went to extreme lengths to make health care companies happy and it was nearly identical to the bill proposed by Republicans many times in the past. Yet nowt that the Democrats tried to pass it the Republicans refused to support it and in fact attacked it with such lies as "Death Panels" and that it is a "government takeover" of health care.

This style of governing by the Dems, while not gaining support from the right, has caused them to lose support from the left. Those on the left see many of the problems such as the economy and health care as being rooted in corporate greed, meaning to fix these things you cannot be on the side of the corporations as many of the Dems are.

Progressives, myself included, are disappointed by the fact that the Democrats are not pushing for a more populist, progressive agenda and many are not fired up to vote for the Democrats - some will not vote, perhaps some will vote for a third party.

This is the Democrats fault and may be their downfall but it is essential that we do what we can to prevent the Democrats from paying the price for their lame political maneuvering.

The Republicans and conservative Democrats have created the problems we now face by cutting taxes which created our deficit, starting wars that increased it, pushing deregulation that led to the recession, oil spills, salmonella outbreaks, etc. Their strategy of dealing with the deficit is to cut programs that help the poor and middle class - health care, education, social security, housing, etc. And they want to cut taxes further and push more deregulation - further entrenching our problems.

So the Republicans screw it up, the Dems take charge, the Republicans prevent the Dems from fixing the problems by obstructing congress completely, they blame the Dems for the problems since they are in charge, the Republicans plan to do more of what caused the problems if they get elected, and it looks like this strategy might translate into a Republican sweep in November. A sad statement of Americans.

We cannot let it happen - we must work hard to get the Dems elected and we must be proud to vote for them. Even though for me I am mainly voting against the Republicans, I am proud and excited to cast my vote against the party that is destroying this country.

To those who say the Dems and Republicans are the same, here are a few illustrations why this is false:

When the Democrats recently passed a law to give money to local governments to prevent the lay off of teachers, firefighters, etc and to pay for it by closing corporate tax loopholes they had to pass it despite Republican efforts to stop it.

Recently the Democrats, in reaction to the recent supreme court decision that corporations can donate unlimited money to political campaigns, tried to pass a law saying that at least the corporation must disclose to which political campaigns they are donating. The republicans blocked it.

The Democrats have tried to close many loop holes in the corporate tax code to make corporations return to paying taxes like they did a decade or two ago (this could reduce the deficit by hundreds of billions or trillions of dollars) - the Republicans fight them every time (so much for fiscal conservatives).

Obama wants to let the Bush tax cuts for the top 2% expire - (I think for a total of about 800 million dollars) - the Republicans vow to fight him.

The list can go on and on and on.

The Democrats in congress are diverse - there are progressives and conservatives - they do not always agree and rarely do they all agree. This is because they represent America. The Republicans in congress almost always vote united, this is because they represent a narrow agenda - that of the corporate super rich of the world. (of the world because more and more of them are moving to places like Dubai as they destroy this country and take its wealth with them)

We need more Democrats in government and less Republicans. Period. In primaries push for more progressive Democrats but we need to embrace the democratic party as our best hope for the future and keep these poisonous Republicans out.

The Republicans running (and maybe winning) this November are pushing for things like the abolition of social security and public education. Meg Whitman promises further cuts in California, a state that has been shredded already. 'Downsize government and help business' is their motto. Problem is they only downsize government social programs - still spending crazy amounts of money on private jails, military occupation, etc and by helping business like Carly Fiorina's Hewlett Packard offshore tens of thousands of jobs and offshore their banking so they pay no taxes in the US. Corporations used to contribute 33% of the Federal Budget and now they contribute just 12%. No wonder our country is broke and the CEOs of these companies are so wealthy they are financing their own political campaigns.

And Let's not forget that by downsizing government they mean fire workers - sounds like a great idea when we are fighting unemployment. Government jobs are the bulk of the jobs out there since corporations chose to employ people in other countries when they can.

As usual, I have rambled more than enough...

God help us of the Republicans take control of congress - please help get out the vote for the Democrats.

100th blog post: George Bush "Because I got High"

2010-08-20T14:09:00.001-07:00

High Gang,

Well I am back at school for the first day after summer break. Listening to the radio as I get my class room back together and I heard a funny song that I had to post.

It is a take off of an already pretty funny but very inappropriate song by Afroman called "Because I got High" but this one is "sung" by George Bush our illustrious former pres.

It just happens to be my 100th political blog post, perfect.

For the link click here: George Bush: "Because I Got High"

peace ya'll.

And remember just because they say the oil in the gulf is 75% is gone, the economy has recovered, and the combat troops are out of Iraq does not make it so.

100th blog post: George Bush because I got High"

2010-08-20T14:09:00.000-07:00

How to vote in California on June 8th.

2010-06-07T08:17:00.000-07:00

How to vote in California on June 8th.

(I wrote this weeks ago, I guess I better get it out...)

I just read my ballot and I am fired up. I cannot believe the anti tax people. But I will get to that later.

I am registered Green so I will not go into the candidates in my primary. If you are Republican, well I heard today that Dick Cheney endorsed Meg Whitman. That is enough for me to wish I was registered Republican so I could vote against her. I was shopping at Goodwill in the mission district of San Francisco the other day and the music playing stopped and I heard a woman's voice: "I will CRACK DOWN on illegal immigrants and I will CRACK DOWN on sanctuary cities like San Francisco!!" It was an odd thing to hear, and the tone of voice was driving home fear. It was Meg Whitman. I screamed out in the Goodwill "Oh no! She's coming to crack down on us!"

State Propositions:

Prop 13: Yes, Prevent people from having an excuse not to do improvements for earthquakes

Prop 14: NO. This will eliminate 3rd parties. Top two vote getters go to the final election regardless of party. You will never get to vote for a 3rd party again. Party members should be able to select their candidate.

Prop 15: Yes: The beginning of campaign finance reform.

Prop 16: NO NO NO NO NO NO This was put up by PG$E who does not want green renewable competition! Marin, for instance, wants to provide consumers with a choice of green energy and this prop. would prevent that. It takes away the competition that capitalism is supposed to be based on.

Prop 17: NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO This means that someone who helped out the world by not driving for a few years would have to pay more than someone who has continuously clogged our streets and polluted our skies. If you commuted by bike for a few years or traveled over seas or served in Iraq you should not pay more for insurance!

Well just a quick note on the anti tax people on my ballot. We are trying to pass a local parcel tax of $150 to make up some of the money that the state cut from our local schools - if it passes we hire back the teachers we fired this spring, if it fails Noah will be in a class of 30 kids with one teacher, instead of 20.

Now the Community Colleges of our County are also trying to pass a parcel tax of $34 a year to make up for their cut budgets. The argument against it cries - We pay enough tax already!!!! Give me a break - $34 a year on a parcel in one of the most richest counties in the Country. The community college is key to giving education to people who will become working tax payers. Keep them uneducated and they will make less money, require more government assistance, and pay less taxes. You get what you pay for and if you don't want to live in a 3rd world country we need to pay taxes so our government can function.

Dear Obama, This is Your Chance

2010-06-04T08:28:00.001-07:00

Dear President Obama,

Presidents are often defined by how they deal with unforeseen events. The Gulf Oil spill is now your opportunity to define your Presidency.

I voted for you and recognize many of the changes you have made in the way our government works. You have had to deal with many challenges left to you by previous administrations. In addressing these challenges you have failed to make the fundamental changes which would address the root cause of these problems. The question you need to ask yourself, is should the Federal Government fight to protect the interests of its citizens and the world in which we live or should it work to protect the unlimited power and greed of the corporate elite?

The BP Oil Spill is another example of how the past 30 years of deregulation and laissez-faire policies by the government has had devestating results. Three weeks before the blow out you said new drilling technology is safer. You failed to mention that although Canada, Norway, and Brazil require this safe technology, we do not. In fact BP admittedly did not even possess the tools to deal with an accident nor did they even have a plan of what to do.

Deregulation led to our economic crisis yet you kept those responsible for these policies in charge of our economy. The Health Insurance Industry has made health care unaffordable to many Americans yet you failed to address this problem. Massey Energy, private military contractors, the pharmaceutical industry, the energy industry. You name it, the power and control they have over the Federal Government is dangerous. Just as BP is demonstrating again (this is not their first case of criminal negligence as you must know) that left on their own, corporations do not look to the future nor do they have any reason to care about people or the environment. They care about profits. The role of the government is to make laws and make sure the corporations act responsibly.

It is time you deliver true change - especially if you want people like myself who worked hard for your election to be motivated to go to the poles in support of you and your party again. I am a green party member who may have to return to my party.

You need to return true balance to the Federal Government. This does not mean compromise with the corporate conservatives. Compromising with them basically gives them what they want. Health Care and Wall Street reform are great examples. If you want to provide balance you need to fight for the people and the environment - the corporate class and their lobbyists have more than enough power. We need you to take them head on and return reason to this country. Historically you have many bold, transformative Presidents from whom to draw inspiration.

A criminal investigation into BP is a start. Bringing back common sense regulations over industry - look at what other countries do to require safer oil drilling. But then you need to apply this across the board. Every issue facing our nation - national security, food security, water security, economic security, environmental security, energy security - they are all pitting uncontrolled corporate greed against the interests of humanity and the global environment. Corporations can still exist, do business, and make their CEOs and investors incredibly wealthy, but they need to be given LIMITS and rules under which they are allowed to operate.

Obama, it is time for you to lead, time for you to deliver the CHANGE those of us who voted for you were HOPING for. I still have the audacity to hope.

Danny Boyer
Half Moon Bay, CA

very interesting elections!

2010-05-19T01:12:00.000-07:00

Well yesterday we had some very interesting elections across the country which have been part of a trend in politics: anti-incumbent, pro "outsider" sentiment.

Obama and the Democrats rode this wave of "bringing CHANGE to Washington" to power two years ago and unfortunately did not change enough so they are now the incumbents ready to lose.

So we have more progressive Democrats beating out the "Republican Light" Democrats (which makes me immensely happy to see) in the primaries and Tea Party backed conservatives beating out incumbent Republicans.

In yesterday's election the Democrat backed by Obama lost (shows you how his leading from the middle sits with Democrats) as did the Republican backed by the Republican establishment.

This of course will have the effect of moving each party away from the middle, further polarizing our government which could make congress less effective but it will also have an interesting effect: it will give voters in the middle more difficult choice.

Of course my personal bias comes in here. I would hope that thoughtful fence sitters will listen to progressives and realize they have well thought out positions that support American Jobs, security, education, environment, economy, etc. Progressives are the real Democrats as opposed to the corporate puppets that so many Democrats have become (Obama included).

The Tea Party and far right, on the other hand, are pushing for more of what has gotten everyone so upset at the government: less regulation making fuck ups like Enron, Goldman Sachs, Massey Energy, and BP even more likely to kill people and ruin our economy and environment as well as "less taxes" which translates to less taxes for the rich and corporations all of whom have enjoyed such a reduction of their taxes in the past 30 years that it has made our government insolvent - unable to pay its bills and requiring it to go into debt and cut vital social programs which actually help our economy and nation by educating people and taking care of people when they need help so they can get back on their feet. 3/4 of corporations, according to Forbes Magazine, do not pay any taxes in the US and this includes corporations like Exxon Mobile who made the largest profit in human history at over $40 Billion (I think in one quarter) and payed no US taxes according to Forbes. While pay for CEOs and the very weathly has skyrocketted in the past few decades their tax rate is one third of what it was for most of our nation's history.

The classic quote from a Tea Party candidate for the California Senate "I am going to lower taxes and fix the public schools". Sorry but anyone who knows California and the plight of public education in the state know how ridiculous this sounds.

Another dangerous and crazy platform of the Tea Partiers: Global Warming is a myth. Deregulate they say. What we need is more CO2, "Drill Baby Drill" you know the deal.

Of course the Tea Party also has a very racist element. Check out their party platforms and speeches and it is full of hate of minorities and immigrants. They also want less government across the board, which of course is code for "let the corporations get away unregulated" but of course the Tea Party crowd either sees themselves in that corporate elite or they are being tricked by clever marketing (or both). This last point is critical. The government needs to regulate big business. If they don't we see what happens everyday. BP kills people and devastates the economy and environment (two months before the accident, letters were sent by whistle blowers warning of BPs lack of adherence to safety regulations to the government outfit that was supposed to enforce those laws. Massey Energy commits 47 safety violations in month leading up to its deadly coal mining disaster. AIG, Goldman Sachs, and the rest of the Too Rich To Fail go unregulated and not only wreck havoc on our economy but now they have put Greece in the tank and Euro on the brink of collapse. Of course as AIG is now being propped up by our tax payer money so if Greece really goes down so does the US economy once again.

So bottom line. Progressives beating (or even almost beating) the likes of Blanche Lincon who didn't even vote with the Democrats on key issues: great news!!!

Tea Party candidates beating Republicans. Well intersting, hopeful, and scary. Hopeful because perhaps this splintering of the Republican party will help Democrats. (not all Republicans will vote for a Sarah Palin style candidate I hope) But scary because if these corporate shills get into power they will further undermine our Democracy.

BP, three strikes you're out!

2010-05-04T18:20:00.000-07:00

OK so BP had an accident. It killed people. It is devastating the lives and livelihood of countless people and wrecking havoc on the environment.

BP has recently lobbied heavily against stronger safety standards.

BP has been on probation and fined for many safety violations.

BP plead guilty to felony conduct in its lack of following safety regulations that led to a deadly explosion at a Texas refinery.

BP was found guilty in its lack of up keep of its Alaskan pipeline that led to an oil spill in fragile Arctic habitat.

Now the supreme court has said corporations are people. If people commit felonies they go to prison. If they get out on parole and violate their parole they go back to prison. If you are a repeat offender you go to prison for a long time. In California we call it "three strikes, you're out". The third strike could be smoking a joint.

If someone commits a crime that kills people they can get the death penalty.

If corporations are people they should be able to get the death penalty when they kill people. Or at least go to prison for a long time.

Instead corporations pay fines which amount to a slap on the wrist. These corporations make billions and pay millions.

The same supreme court that said corporations are people drastically reduced the payout that Exxon had to pay for the Valdez spill.

Lobbying has created a situation where as of now BP will not have to pay more than something like 700 million in damages for the current spill. Which may make Obama's promise that BP will pay ring a bit hollow.

Corporations like BP and Massey energy who continue to break safety laws and and up killing people should be out of business. Period. Give them the death penalty.

As a side note I would like to thank BP for doing what environmentalists have tried to do but failed: prevent future offshore oil drilling in California! Swarzenager had supported future oil drilling but now that he saw the BP spill he withdrew his support and said "never in COLLIEEFOURNIA".

for details of BP's crimes go here:

OSHA: Ongoing Safety Violations at BP's US Refineries Endanger Employees' Lives

and a short video I just saw with a similar view point:

Corporate Bombs Demand Justice Too

Letter to Obama re: offshore oil drilling

2010-04-29T09:44:00.000-07:00

Dear Mr. President,

I was disheartened to hear your speech on March 31st when you announced that you would lift the moratorium on drilling for oil off our coast. In your speech you even made the point against it by explaining how little oil we actually have compared to how much we use.

You said it was time to "move beyond the tired debates of the left and the right, between business leaders and environmentalists..."

I hope the current tragic oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico illustrates clearly that rather than 'tired debates' we are talking life and death here, not just of the workers killed but the very biological system which allows us all to live and our economy to thrive.

I worked hard for your election, in a large part to prevent the "drill baby drill" camp from taking control of our government. I do not agree with much of your politics but I thought energy and environmental issues was one place I did agree with you. I have been disappointed in this area, for rather than trying to move on from the old debates I had hoped you would take the side of the environmentalists. I had hoped you would be bold, audacious, and a transformative leader, at least when it comes to energy and the environment.

An example of such leadership can be found in a young man named Timothy DenHerder who as a freshman at Macalester College spearheaded a program called the Clean Energy Revolving Fund (CERF). I believe a massive government program modeled after this program would be the kind of intelligent action you should take as President. Best of all the program pays for itself and would easily allow us to conserve more than the energy we could get from new off shore oil drilling.

The CERF is quite simple. College students got together and installed inexpensive energy and water saving devices in a home. The money that was saved from the reduction in energy and water use was put into a fund that was used to do further energy saving actions in other homes. This fund grew as did their actions to the point where they replaced all the light bulbs in their University.

I know you have done some things like this but nothing on the scale required. Imagine leading the nation to rally around the idea of energy efficiency (it saves everyone money - easy motivator). Reduce the electricity we use, invest in electric cars, break our dependence on foreign oil and our temptation to drill off our coasts, make the US a leader in green technology and CO2 reduction, create good jobs. Of course you know Van Jones so these ideas are not new to you.

The offshore wind farm in Cape Cod is another example of an action your government has taken that is in the right direction.

Doing what is needed and what is right does not always mean comprimising and finding middle ground. Sometimes you need to take a side and be willing to push hard against those who disagree. In fact the middle road often means watering down good ideas to the point they will not be successful. A little oil drilling can still lead to oil spills. Please say no to new oil drilling and yes to energy conservation and clean energy.

Still trying to be a supporter of yours,
Danny Boyer

The simple case against the Arizona Immigration law

2010-04-28T09:14:00.000-07:00

The law just passed in Arizona says police are required to ask people for proof they are here legally if there is a reason to doubt that they are here legally, and if it is discovered they are illegal then they must be turned over to the Feds.

So on its surface it is easy for one to think, what's the big deal? Illegal Immigrants have broken the law by coming here without the proper paperwork. If the cops catch you doing something illegal they bust you for it. If I snuck into another country and was there illegally and a police busted me I would have noone to blame but myself.

Of course the discussion of why people are coming here to work is an entire discussion for another time, this discussion leads some to reject the term "illegal" Immigant. Regardless of how you feel about these issues, the new Law in Arizona is a horrible one and the argument against it is simple.

Now the job of the police is to serve and protect. They are trying to prevent murders, rapes, theft, drug dealing and other such crimes as well as catch criminals who do these crimes.

Imagine a girl is raped. Her father knows who did it. Her father is an undocumented worker. That father should be able to call the police and report the crime. But with this law the police would be required to investigate the father if they suspected he was undocumented.

Or imagine an American citizen is the victim of a crime and the only witness is an undocumented immigrant. Is that witness going to step forth?

You can imagine tons of scenarios like this. Because of this law entire communities will be afraid of the police and far less likely to report crimes.

It is a bad law. Even Meg Whitman (a dubious candidate for California Gov.) is against it.

obstructionist party

2010-04-21T19:36:00.001-07:00

You have to watch this video!!!

The Republicans know that their best chance of getting re-elected by an ignorant American public is to do everything in their power to prevent the government under the leadership of the Democrats from functioning.

The Republicans are currently blocking 101 executive branch nominees. These are people Obama has chosen to run various agencies. Most have been blocked for months, leaving departments leaderless. (This time in Bush's presidency I believe the Dems had a block on 4 nominees).

The Republicans have even admitted they are qualified people with whom they have no objections - they are being blocked purely for political purposes!

It is infuriating!!!!

Here in this video the Democrats try to get permission to get a vote on each of the stalled nominations and at first no Republicans even showed up, but finally the minority whip came and objected to 97 of the 101 nominees. This video is a must watch, it is funny and sad at the same time!

Obama on energy - bad policy, bad politics

2010-04-03T12:06:00.000-07:00

Obama gets a "D" (for Dumb) from me on his energy policy.

In his state of the union he talked about a clean energy future and mentioned - nuclear, coal, oil, and bio fuels and left out solar and wind from his speech. Interestingly he included the ones that are the most easily controlled by corporations.

But that was just a speech. Since then he announced new federal loan guarantees to encourage the building of the first new nuclear power plants in decades. This is stupid in my mind - dangerous, expensive, and wasteful. If we poured an equal amount of money into making solar and wind viable.

But then what really got me was his recent announcement that he is lifting the moratorium on offshore oil drilling. He made the argument against himself when he made the announcement. We use 25% of the world's oil yet we own only 2%. Our domestic supply is a drop in the bucket and I would argue against burning it up now. Petroleum has other uses - try and find something not made from the stuff - besides burning it for energy. That is one reason I believe it is bad policy.

But I know that someday we will drill our oil that is offshore so that is not what surprised me most about Obama's announcement. Besides bad policy it is horrible politics.

"Drill Baby Drill" is the rally cry of conservatives. By now it must be obvious that the conservatives want nothing more than for Obama to fail at everything he does. This, they see is their path back into power.

They criticize everything he does and regularly make up lies about his agenda. Remember the "death panels" or more recently the claims the health care bill was a government takeover. Even when Obama has done or said the exact same thing as previous Republican presidents such as Reagan and Bush Sr. the conservatives have attacked him for these very statements. (example his recent nuclear policy statement - Palin said no president would ever say that, however Reagan and Bush both did).

When Obama announced lifting the ban on offshore oil drilling he was lambasted by Conservatives as not going far enough, too little too late, etc. Obama needs to learn he will not win praise from the right.

So if you are going to allow drilling why not save it as a bargaining chip towards a climate and energy bill! Offer up a bill that will reduce carbon emissions, invest in renewable energy and then to get republican support tell them, after hard negotiation, that they will throw in offshore oil drilling. This also provides cover for conservatives who vote for an energy bill for they can say they negotiated to get the bill to include offshore oil drilling.

So far the Dems and this administration have proved poor at the politics of negotiation with conservatives. They don't seem to understand that they need to start the process asking for more than they think they can get so once things are negotiated they end up getting something closer to what they want.

you get my drift, I'm off like mosquito repellent

US militias and our illogical justification for war

2010-03-30T06:21:00.000-07:00

So let me get this straight. Our government just arrested a bunch of Christian militia members who were plotting to kill police and start a war against the government. The Mumbai terrorist attacks were planned in Chicago. Domestic terrorists have bombed Oklahoma city and shot military personal at Fort Hood. The newest political party in this country (the Tea Party) is planning a gun rally near Washington DC on the anniversary of the Oklahoma city bombing. 911 was planned in Spain (another democracy).

Obama says Afghanistan is a war of necessity. We are there killing people and spending hundreds of billions of dollars that could provide desperately needed education, health care, and jobs here and there because why? The goal in Afghanistan and Iraq is democracy, right? Obama says he does not want it to be a place where extremists can plot terrorist attacks. We must "win the war" and bring Democracy so no terrorists can plot to kill Americans?

The logic is obviously lacking. We are a democracy - a pretty good, safe place, yet we have extremists plotting and carrying out terrorist attacks. Americans plot to kill other Americans. Militia training camps abound and are on the rise. So, Obama, if Afghanistan becomes a beacon of freedom and democracy in the middle east - a mini USA, what will prevent religious extremists from plotting terrorist attacks there as they do here?

So again I ask why are we bankrupting our country morally and financially to occupy foreign countries by force?

Obama's solution: Fire Teachers, Leave Poor Kids Behind

2010-03-02T10:04:00.000-08:00

Well I am in complete disagreement with Obama on the issue of education.

He came out today in support of the firing of every teacher in a low performing school. And he suggested more teachers need to be fired so there is accountability.

How about firing politicians who underfund our educational system! Firing politicians who expand wars we can't afford and increase military spending while freezing all other spending.

How about hiring MORE teachers so class sizes can be reduced!

Our local district is an underachieving district - now on probation from No Child Left Behind. I do not blame the teachers or want them fired! There are many factors that influence the success of students - such as the education of their parents, their parents ability to support and encourage the students, the culture of the community in which they are growing up, the socioeconomic level of the students. What the students eat has an enormous effect on their ability to learn and the poor kids who get government meals are fed the most processed disgusting food imaginable. I know - I worked at such a school and although I can eat almost anything, I could not eat the lunches provided to the kids.

Fact is poverty has been proven to inhibit the development of the brain, hindering young students ability to perform when compared to children growing up free from poverty.

In our school's case we have many students who are speaking English as a second language, many of who's parents are migrant farm workers. Of course they will score lower on tests than the kids in Palo Alto who's parents work at Stanford!

Standardized tests also fail to fairly test students from a variety of cultural backgrounds.

If we fire teachers in low achieving schools, who in their right mind would choose to work at such a school. This will surely drive teachers away from the schools where they are needed the most. Once again, Poor Kids are Left Behind, I guess it was presumptuous of me to think having a man of color in the White House would change that.

If Obama wants to solve education, which will improve our economy, environment, politics, etc.; he needs to role back the Bush Tax Cuts for the wealthiest in this nation and stop the Bush Wars in the Middle East and put those resources instead into our crumbling educational system.

Try returning dynamic art, athletic, and music programs to public schools. Feed the students organic whole foods, provide an engaging fun environment - reduce class size!!! Give teachers money to attend professional development seminars.

How about providing a living wage to the kids parents so they do not have to work three jobs and can instead be home with their kids after school.

Blaming teachers for low achieving schools is like blaming doctors for the increase in childhood obesity and diabetes.

The despicable state of California (and US) public education

2010-02-04T07:34:00.000-08:00

The state of public education in the state of California is despicable, and getting worse!

In three to five more years of No Child Left Behind and the lack of state funding our public school system may fail completely. No Child Left Behind is taking away money from the schools that do not do well on the standardized tests - so schools that are failing will have LESS resources!

It is said that 80% of California public schools will face federal take over in 5 years due to NCLB.

Our public schools rank 47 out of 50 states for funding. There is plenty of money in this state - look at the housing prices and cars. People here have money. But not everyone. Which is the problem with a failing public school system. The wealthy can send their kids to private schools or supplement the public schools (many are asking for $3000 per family) in their area with huge fund raisers. But for neighborhoods where income is low the schools are in a world of hurt. and getting worse.

With further cuts we have school districts talking about increasing class sizes more, cutting whatever extra programs are left (extra are the things like art, music, PE - the things private schools like mine realize are as important as the core subjects and for which parents pay $33,000 a year) and they are talking about maybe only having school 4 days a week so they can pay public school teachers even less!

Also with higher public education being slashed California is now poised to take back its pledge to offer a spot in college for all California residents who qualify. And of course with costs going up many can simply not afford to go to college even if there is a spot.

They say Americans, Californians especially, are becoming less educated on average than we were 20 years ago. Our work force is going to have millions more people who have low levels of education looking for work in an environment where automation and outsourcing is going to decrease the number of jobs available to those with low levels of education.

Meanwhile we are the only state that does not tax oil companies for the oil they take out of our ground! They do pay in other ways but as they are setting records for corporate profits and oil is destroying the world anyway, we should be taxing the hell out of it!

Prisons! The United States of America has more prisoners than any country in the world. China is second but as a larger country has 18% our rate of incarceration. California leads the way with hundreds of thousands of prisoners. The "three strikes your out" law doubled our prison population. They are over crowded and increasingly costly. Arnold's solution - outsource them to Mexico, he said it would cost half as much to build prisons and house prisoners in Mexico. This of course is for prisoners from other countries. For US prisoners he wants to have private prisons - prisons for profit. This makes sense! How can it be cheaper to run something for profit? Unless you cut corners. And even if it is, it has been proven that private prisons just put pressure on the system to create prisoners so the corporations have lots of business - not long ago (2 years maybe) in this country a judge was busted for taking pay offs from a private prison for sending innocent youth to prison!

How about investing in education! Perhaps if we educated people they will be able to get jobs instead of going to jail. Perhaps they will be inspired to do good things. Clearly having an educated population would benefit our economy in more ways than one.

California, you get what you pay for. Are you going to invest in your future?

We must change the rule that a 2/3rds majority is needed to pass a budget, then we need to raise taxes so we can pay for these vital programs, public education being only one of them.

And as for Obama's race to the top - I give him an "F" How can it make sense to give more money to the schools that are doing the best???? The schools that are doing the worst are the ones that need the most help.

We need to repeal NCLB for it is penalizing the same schools that need more help. It should be called "poor kids left behind". And of course it is ruining the quality of education by making schools teach their students to take standardized tests rather than teaching them to be creative and informed thinkers, which in turn will prepare them to be positive contributors to our society.

Alright, no time to continue this rant, I must take my private school students on a field trip. One of our fathers helped organize a trip to the Stanford Neurology Lab. We are going to be taught about the brain by Stanford Neurologists, we will handle real brains, learn clinical exams from interns, and see state of the art virtual imaging for brain and skull research. You see my students are being educated very differently than my own children who go to public school, simply because we cannot afford the better education, the kind of education all kids should get!

another fine Republican

2010-01-25T08:59:00.000-08:00

GOP Hopeful: People on Public Assistance "Like Stray Animals"

Saturday 23 January 2010

by: Nathaniel Cary | McClatchy Newspapers

Lieutenant Governor Andre Bauer jogging with Mike Huckabee. (Photo: ltgovbauer)

Greenville - Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer has compared giving people government assistance to "feeding stray animals."

Bauer, who is running for the Republican nomination for governor, made his remarks during a town hall meeting in Fountain Inn that included state lawmakers and about 115 residents.

"My grandmother was not a highly educated woman, but she told me as a small child to quit feeding stray animals. You know why? Because they breed. You're facilitating the problem if you give an animal or a person ample food supply. They will reproduce, especially ones that don't think too much further than that. And so what you've got to do is you've got to curtail that type of behavior. They don't know any better," Bauer said.

The worst supreme court decision EVER!!- the end of our democracy?

2010-01-21T09:04:00.000-08:00

Well I just heard that the supreme court has decided corporations have the right to free speech and that congress cannot limit how much money they contribute to political campaigns.

This seriously is the worst news possible for our democracy.

I will write more about this soon but for now my first reaction.

The supreme court has decided that money is equal to free speech and that a corporation has the same rights as a human citizen. So this says the corporations can give unlimited money to influence politics. This means they can buy politicians.

They already have too much ability to influence politics as is obvious in all that Washington is doing today.

But this is TERRIBLE. Everyone should read what the four Supreme Court Justices that voted against this decision wrote. They lay it out. They say this is reckless! They say that corporations can be foreign owned so now China can influence our politics. They point out that the framers of this country believed corporations should be kept under control by the government, not the other way around!

They also point out that unlimited corporate control of politics will destroy our democracy and prevent politicians from doing things that are in the public interest but that would upset the corporations.

Theses 5 justices who made this decision are Republican appointed activist judges who have gone against the ideas of democracy and turned this country into a truly Fascist state!

Fascism in the combining of corporations and government, which we now have, corporate control of our political system.

We needed to reduce the power of corporations in the political arena and now the supreme court has done the opposite!!!

Ouch, deathblow to democracy

2010-01-12T15:51:00.001-08:00

Ok, this is crazy!

We have around 200,000 private contractors working in Iraq and Afghanistan. By law the companies must provide each employee a from of workman's comp insurance. very few insurance companies offer such insurance for war zones.

AIG provides 85% of these policies and they charge a rate of 1 to 1 based on the employees salary so someone making $100,000 in a year (an average salary for the work) would cost $100,000 to insure. This cost is paid for by the American Taxpayer through the Pentagon which is who pays for these contracts.

Now the craziest part is that there is another law that requires the American government to reimburse an insurance company 100% of medical costs incurred by someone in a combat zone. So we pay AIG $100,000 a year per person for insurance and then reimburse AIG for all their medical costs!!!!!

The Pentagon has actually suggested cutting AIG out of the equation which would save taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars if not billions but as of yet there is noone in Congress who wants to try and get rid of this crazy law that lines the pockets of the insurance industry who intern keeps the politicians on their payrole via campaign contributions and lobbying jobs (which pay millions). Piss off the corporations and you piss off your future employer and cash cow .once you are out of office.

This info was from T. Christian Miller who wrote the book : "Blood Money: Wasted Billions, Lost Lives, and Corporate Greed in Iraq" and who's new book focuses on the lives of those contractors who take the jobs supporting our military and what happens to them once they are injured by war. It is called somthing like "our throw away army".

Check out his Defense Act Compensation Blog

How obama is making us less safe

2010-01-02T11:59:00.000-08:00

OK Things are looking worse, I feel like this is de ja vu from the Bush years.

So we had an attempted terrorist attack. Airport security failed to stop it but passengers did stop it.

So what to do? Obama talks about this huge failure. What about all the people who smuggle drugs into this country every day. The war on drugs is a failure just as the war on terror is and forever will be.

So let's stop fighting it!!!

Improve security when possible. But it will always be possible to blow up a plane. Militants have already put bombs inside their bodies that were remotely activated. We should not waste too much money and energy freaking out about airport security. What we need to do is stop doing the things that make the world hate us.

And Obama is doing the opposite. Escalation in Afghanistan, drone attacks in Pakistan, now talk of military action in Yemen where this latest terrorist may have trained.

We cannot kill all the terrorists! For every militant our drones kill in Pakistan we kill 10 civilians. The Taliban show up after a drone attack and recruit the brothers,etc of the civilians killed - increasing their numbers far beyond the one militant we may have killed.

We give military aide to Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan, they intern buy weapons we make here in the US (our only last export) and then we go around killing people over there, supporting Israel as they kill people, and all this makes the world more dangerous and makes the Christmas day attempt more and more likely.

If we want to be safe, airport scanners (that may give us cancer) are not the answer!!! Ending US led violence abroad and the militarization of the world for profit are what we need to focus on.

Obama said change doesn't come from Washington it comes to Washington. Well he is Washington %100 and he is going for the same old "smoke em out and kill 'em all" strategy that will not work. The anti war movement better stop celebrating their victory over McCain/Palin and start bringing some of that change TO Washington.

Stop the War on Terror. War IS Terror!

post script

Now I must ad a little post script. As disapointed I am in the Democratic Leadership running our country I must point out that the Republicans are still worse so no matter how much the Dems suck we must keep the Republicans from regaining control

This terrorist incident has illustrated that fact once again. While we have this breach in airline security, Obama's nominee to run the department in charge of Airline security is being held up right now by the Republicans because they fear he will unionize airport security workers. Their fight against unions (the working class) is so deep rooted it trumps their concern for national security. Of course they use twisted logic to say unions will make us less safe but that is a shallow argument.

Thank you Joe Lieberman (will Obama learn his lesson)

2009-12-17T07:40:00.000-08:00

So after campaigning on universal health care, Lieberman (the second largest recipient in the senate of money from the insurance and medical industries), Lieberman insisted the public option be taken out of the Senate Bill. The Dems went along with him.

In its place they put in a provision that would lower the eligible age for Medicare to 55, something Joe was also in favor of. Now he has killed that provision as well.

Thank you Joe Lieberman for showing the voters of America your true colors (obstructionist lying Republican). Now that the Health Care Bill is completely gutted of anything that will lower costs for consumers the Republicans in the Senate are STILL united against it! Once again, thanks, this also allows the voters of America to see where the Republican party stands - against the American public.

So if Joe Lieberman or any Republicans still have their jobs after they come up for re-election, well then the voters are to blame, for it can not be more clear that they are not interested in helping the American people. This also applies to the "blue dog" democrats that have been working on behalf of the insurance industry throughout this process.

I agree with Howard Dean that this bill should now be killed. It, in fact, requires people to buy private insurance (with tax payer subsidies for the poor) while refusing to offer any option. This, in fact, will drive up costs and actually benefits the insurance companies that were the problem in the first place!!!

Now for Obama. He of course is proving to be quite a corporatist (unlike the socialist the Right tries to make him out to be) so maybe he is happy with this bill. But with that being said he needs to learn his lesson from Joe Lieberman! Joe campaigned against Obama in support of McCain. Then when there was talk of stripping Joe of his committee chairmanship Obama stepped in and said, we need to work together and not hold grudges. Obama has gone out of his way to get Republican support for this Health Bill and other legislation. Even though the Republicans went on record as saying they want this issue to fail in order to take out Obama.

So when will Obama learn the lesson that these Republicans (Joe included) are not to be worked with, much less catered to. Obama and the Democrats need to push for strong legislation, allow the Republicans to filibuster it if that is what they choose, and then make the point to the voters that the Republicans are obstructing progress and they need to go.

I want to see a strong, principled Obama, not a weak compromising Obama. I do realize that the latter is probably his true political self but it is proving ineffective against the united Republican front against the American People.

two good developments in health care reform!

2009-12-09T21:25:00.000-08:00

OK, I am feeling a bit optimistic about the progress of the health care reform in congress. Two items of news made me happy:

first the senate voted down the anti abortion ammendment and that was just a horrible attack on poor women. It is still in the House Bill and must be defeated. It says women cannot buy insurance that covers abortion. This means only women who can pay out of their own pocket can afford abortions. This would be most hurtful to those who have complications late in a wanted pregnancy and must pay for an EXPENSIVE emergancy abortion that is already something they do not really want to do. BAD. And for the poor it will return folks to back alley abortions.

second the senate says they may scrap the public option and hire a private insurance company to run the "public option". I just love this irony!!!! BUT there are two good things that I like about this plan.

First the public option was going to be so shitty that it would discredit the who idea of a public option. This way in the future there will still be the desire for a public option and we just may get a stronger one.

Second, they said instead they may lower the enrollment age for medicare to 55 years old. THIS is a brilliant plan! The infrastructure is already there. If that works out then perhaps we can lower it even further in the future, and then further, and then finally have the OPTION of medicare for anyone who would like it. GREAT IDEA, didn't I say that a long time ago. Me and many others, I can't take credit for the idea.

the only MORAL choice: leave Afghanistan NOW

2009-12-01T15:46:00.000-08:00

[I wrote this before Obama's speech, a brief reaction to his speech will soon follow]

First there should be no surprise that Obama is sending more troops to Afghanistan. He said when he was running for President that he thought we did not send enough and that Afghanistan was the war we should be fighting. He was against the Iraq war which is why he seemed the peace candidate to many. He was really the candidate of less war. Dennis Kucinich was the Peace candidate. And Ron Paul I suppose. And Ralph Nader. And Cynthia McKinney.

Many of my smartest friends and family seem to agree with Obama and the conventional wisdom that we need to stay in Afghanistan. End what we started. Protect the Afghan people from the horrible Taliban. Prevent creating a safe haven for Al Qaida. A 'you break it, you buy it' sort of attitude.

These arguments might hold some water if we were putting a good government in charge of the country. But the truth is we have been fighting what will be the longest war in US history to put War Lords, Drug Lords, War Criminals, Corrupt Urban Elite, Mass Murderers, and Misogynists in charge of the country.

We were giving the Taliban money just months before we invaded. We helped them get in power to throw out the Russians and now we are supporting equally bad people to get rid of them. The government we are propping up just legalized the rape of women, to give just one example.

Look at the recent election - both candidates were involved in wide spread fraud. One is a War Lord from the Northern Alliance and one (the current president) is corrupt and his brother is a drug Lord. Afghanistan is one of the most corrupt countries on Earth, is a decade of war going to make it a peaceful democracy?

The people we are fighting may call themselves the Taliban. But they are mostly tribal people who do not want to be ruled by the Urban Elite and they are fighting the foreign occupation. When we leave they will most likely fight any outsiders who try to control them. We are taking sides in an ethnic civil war, much like Iraq. What are we going to do? Train one ethnic group to go into rural villages and kill another, that is genocide.

As long as we are there they will fight us.

When we leave they will fight each other. This is just as likely if we leave now or later. There very may well be a civil war, but that was guaranteed when our government (R and D) went into the country and destabilized it. Barbara Lee was the only person in the House or Senate who voted the way I would have voted: against the war in Afghanistan in the first place. I think it is about time to replace my "surfers for obama" sticker with a 'barbara lee speaks for me' sticker.

OTHER REASONS:

The Al Qaida excuse is now mute as there are only 100 left in the country according to our own government. But this was never a good reason to invade the entire country. 9/11 was planned in Spain and Germany and the terrorists got their flight training in the United States. They do not need any particular country to operate from. The war on terror is a recruiting gold mine for anti American militants.

Many are complaining in this country because we are running up deficits and we can't afford health care reform. Ah, but there is endless money for war. It costs $1 million dollars per soldier per year. Much of this expense is due to the privatization of many services that were one run by the military. Privatization means profit. War for profit.

$1 million dollars will build 20 school in Afghanistan.

One of my students raises money to send wheel chairs to Iraqi kids. The program is privately funded but supported by the military. A wheel chair costs the organization $350. They have raised half a million dollars so far. The pictures of the people who get those wheel chairs are of happy, grateful people. Why does it take kids playing guitars on street corners in America to win the hearts and minds of those in the middle east? Why can't our government learn from such examples?

I say pull out our guns and build schools. Stop dropping bombs and drop wheel chairs. Build hospitals. Ask the people what they need and want. Show the world there is another way to deal with a country like Afghanistan. Then get out and let the people who live there deal with each other how they chose. Use the United Nations to pressure the government to abide by international standards like they do with every other awful regime.

The Taliban control half the country. What happens even if we put in a government. How many years before it is overthrown? Look at Honduras. We cannot control the world. The Northern Allience are no better than the Taliban. What about working with all the Ethnic groups in Afghanistan, including those who comprise the Taliban, to come together with eachother in peace. We are arming one side against the other, fueling war. Where is the deplomacy?

The ONLY moral choice: GET ( OUR MILITARY) OUT OF AFGHANISTAN, get our military out of Iraq, get our military out of Pakistan.

More citizens of this country die every year (way more) due to lack of health insurance than were killed by Al Qaida. The countries of Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Iran have never attacked us.

OK, you get the point.

health care debate, the latest

2009-11-23T09:29:00.000-08:00

Well the health care debate is now allowed to continue in the Senate as the Democrats joined unanamously to break the Republican Fillubister against debate.

Now this was just a vote to allow debate on the bill. Every single republican was against even allowing debate on the bill.

One of the most important issues to the American people, one that has dominated politics for years, and the Republicans don't even want to debate it.

Now the Republicans say they will filibuster every single amendment that is to be debated. This means for every amendment all 60 Democrats need to agree and vote on each amendment.

They are doing everything they can to stop this legislation from passing. This includes putting in anti abortion amendments and even amendments regarding gun laws as a strategy to sink the reform ship.

What good are the Republicans if they do not even want to debate important issues and fight with all their might to prevent any reform for the American people. They are so pro corporate and anti American it is crazy.

And the political wisdom is that if the Dems don't deliver they will suffer in the next election. Harry Reed for example, may not get re-elected if he cannot get all 60 Dems to agree on a Bill. How utterly idiotic is this! With our two party system if the Dems lose, the Republicans win. So if the Dems try and fail to provide Health Care Reform the party that did every thing they could to prevent it from passing will come out on top?

Clearly if we fail at health care reform now we need to elect MORE democrats and MORE PROGRESSIVE Democrats so they can actually get stuff done.

Ironically the conservative Dems and Republicans say cost is a big problem but they are the ones that are adamantly against all the reform that would reduce cost! A strong public option for instance (stronger than the one in the bill now), but to go even further, single payer.

They insist that if we have reform it must be in a way that still allows private insurers to profit, which is the reason health care is so expensive, and then they complain about the cost. Dumb. The bill we are going to end up with is going to use tax payer money to pay private insurers to insure people. Of course it is going to cost a lot, that is why we are having this debate in the first place.

I am actually thinking it would be best if this bill passes without the public option. The public option they are proposing is so awful that it will not effect most of us nor will it bring down the costs for anyone. It is designed to be expensive and uncompetitive. Better to get no public option and then to come back with a real one someday - medicare for all, or perhaps states will start with single payer systems and serve as models. Not that we don't have plenty of models with all the other countries out there doing better than us.

I wish they had done it in parts from the start. Started with Health Care Insurance Reform and get rid of the pre-existing conditions,etc. Then later they could work on expanding coverage through expanding and improving Medi-care.

Right now it looks like we have 2,000 pages of crap that will do a few good things but will not provide the reform needed.

It makes me laugh when I get emails from the Democrats and Dem leaning groups like Move-on saying we are on the verge of HISTORIC legislation addressing the biggest moral issue of all time. I don't think this bill is something to be so proud of as a progressive or liberal. I am glad I am not in congress, I would have a hard time voting for the bill the way it is. My vote is with Bernie Sanders - he is right on the issue, we'll see what he thinks of the final bill.

The Irony of my students' fund raiser

2009-11-10T09:32:00.000-08:00

Tomorrow for Veterans Day my students are having a walk-a-thon to raise money for homeless veterans. How Ironic kids need to raise money for veterans in a country that spend more on its military than the entire rest of the world combined!

I heard on the radio today that there are 130,000 homeless veterans (veterans are twice as likely to be homeless as the average American) and I read this morning that 1.5 million Veterans do not have health insurance and a Harvard Medical School study just reported that 2,266 Veterans died in 2008 due to lack of insurance - 14 times as many as died in Afghanistan.

And the right wingers who support these wars use the rallying cry of "Support our Troops".

Again Reagan is to blame for much of it as he cut Veteran funding and no president since has restored it (also to blame).

Universal Health Care Anyone? I am sure those 1.5 million vets would love it. They have no insurance for the same reason 50 million Americans don't - they aren't poor enough to get government help for health care yet they do not make enough to afford purchasing it on their own.

And the new Wealth Care Bill coming through congress is likely to require those without insurance to buy it and if they cannot afford it, the taxpayers will pay the private insurers who have been gouging us, to cover them. Business is gonna be good for the Insurance companies after this "reform."

health care reform, a sick democracy and a cure - public financing!

2009-11-05T18:11:00.000-08:00

OK I gotta rant a little about the health care reform situation.

After all this debate we have 2,000 pages in the house up for a vote in a matter of days, no Republicans are expected to vote for it and no one knows if enough Dems will vote for it.

We are the only industrialized nation in the world that has this level of dysfunction regarding health care and insurance companies. The fact is our democracy is sick and until we make it better we will never solve problems like health care.

Money controls our politics. The health care industry has spent 400,000,000 dollars lobbying to prevent real health care reform. Corporate profits are in the way of affordable health care for all. And our government officials have drafted a 2,000 page bill that benefits the corporations more than the citizens of this country.

This bill, according to Nancy Pelosi is going to provide 50 million new costumers to the insurance companies, many of which will be subsidized by tax payer dollars while the public option will only have an anticipated 6 million people who will qualify and sign up by 2019!

This whole situation is proving that our democracy is deathly ill.

Another example: every single Republican boycotted the mark up of a Climate Change Bill and our government just may destroy the chance of the world coming together successfully in Denmark in December in what many say is the last chance for a real international protocol to be effective.

The cure: PUBLIC FINANCING for campaigns. If we want politicians who are answerable to US and not the drug companies, wall street banks, oil and coal companies and military contractors then we need to have publicly financed election campaigns. Take the money out of politics. Most democracies in the world do it this way and we must if we want our government back!!!!!

time for us to push the politicians

2009-10-27T11:45:00.000-07:00

FIND YOUR REPRESENTATIVE'S CONTACT INFO HERE: congressional directory

the white house switchboard is: 202-456-1414

Well it is now one of those times when every one of us needs to do our civic duty and take part in our democracy. A couple quick phone calls is all that is called for.

As we have been witnessing, the politicians in Washington have been debating what to do about our health care system for some time now. We have now been told that both the Senate and House bills will include a public option.

It is a weak, watered down, innefficient version (single payer would be much better of course) but we must put the pressure on to keep the public option and to support some of the progressive ammendments like Bernie Sander's state single payer option.

Know that without a public option rates are likely to go up! The legislation is forcing companies to take preexisting conditions, cover pregnancy, etc. The companies have said this will make them raise rates so they can continue their obscene profits.

Also it is requiring everyone get insurance and without a public option the tax payers will be paying the private insurance companies to insure the people who cannot afford it.

There is going to be a lot of pressure being put on those in congress by the insurance industry and conservative groups and we need to balance that with pressure from the citizens for whom health care reform is intended.

Of course there will be lots of debate and there are many ammendments to be considered - ranging from single payer bills from the left to who knows what from the right. So bottom line we still do not know what we will end up with.

What is important right now is that we all call our representatives and tell them how we want them to vote. Ask them to take a stand for single payer if you want, but most importantly, if you believe in having a public option then tell them you will be watching how they vote very carefully and that we need a STRONG PUBLIC OPTION.

You can also call Harry Reed and thank him for including a public option in the Senate bill, it was not a given that he would do that, it was key that he did, and he is taking heat from the senators who represent the corporations and not the people for doing it.

FIND YOUR REPRESENTATIVE'S CONTACT INFO HERE: congressional directory

also call the white house and tell them you want Obama to use his leadership to push hard for a strong public option.

the white house switchboard is: 202-456-1414

a day of global climate action

2009-10-26T08:13:00.000-07:00

On October 24, 2009 over 5,000 actions in over 180 countries took place to raise awareness surrounding the issue of global climate change.

The organizers - 350.org - chose a number because a number is more easily understood across boarders and languages. 350 in particular, represents the parts per million of greenhouse gasses that many scientists (originally a NASA scientist) have determined the limit above which we will experience dramatic climate destabilization. (we are now at 387 ppm so we need to actually go backwards).

It is worth going to the 350 website and checking out the slide show of actions from around the world - it is quite moving to see people from all over the world coming together to express concern over a single pressing issue.

It is also worth noting that while the world is concerned about this issue, Americans are actually becoming LESS concerned with it as a recent poll shows that the number of United States citizens who believe global climate change is a real problem is actually going down!

I was attending a conference called Re-imagining High School so was not able to take part in any planned actions. Instead I drew on a t-shirt and wore it throughout the day. It sparked lots of conversation. One presenter, during his talk, called me out on my shirt, showed us a photo his school had taken that morning for 350 and then I saw others in the audience googling 350 to see what it was all about. The conversations continued later that night as I had a drink in a bar and spurred conversation with patrons and the bar tender alike. The photo of my shirt is on the 350 flicker stream.

The back of my shirt gave the phone numbers for congress ((202)224-3121) and the white house (202-456-1414) so people can call and tell their elected employees to take serious action to fight climate change and in particular to tell Obama to go to Copenhagen in December to push for a strong international committment on the matter.

peace,
Danny

Island Nation of Maldives Holds Cabinet Meeting Underwater to Highlight Danger of Global Warming

2009-10-20T10:44:00.000-07:00

Check out the Maldives President, he pulled a great PR stunt but also speaks so well at the United Nations:

president of Maldives on Climate Change

2009-10-20T10:02:00.000-07:00

This is worth checking out!
The Yes men who have pulled pranks on Dow Chemical, Exxon, the US government, and others to expose issues they feel important have pulled another stunt, this time on the US Chamber of Commerce.
The Chamber has spent $300,000 a day lobbying against climate change legislation, even causing many of its biggest members to pull out of the chamber.
The Yes men held a fake press conference pretending to the the Chamber and telling reporters that they changed their mind and that they do now support efforts to fight climate change. The news spread around the world before it was discovered to be a hoax and even Fox news reported it live, until being interupted with a note saying it was a hoax.
see it all at: Yes Men Prank on Chamber of Commerce

peace,
Danny

Nobel Speech Prize plus Obama and Zinn on the prize

2009-10-09T07:55:00.000-07:00

So I heard this morning that Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize. The reason given was his reaching out to the Muslim world and his work towards non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. My first reaction, talk is cheap.

I like Obama and hope that by the end of his Presidency he deserves a Nobel Peace Prize. I had actually never considered it a possibility based on his rhetoric involving our "wars of necessity".

After thinking about it for a moment I had a couple other thoughts. One is that Bush/Cheney brought the standards for US leadership to such an all time low, that Obama, simply by making a speech to the Muslim world and by suggesting we should reduce nuclear weapons he has been given the Nobel Peace Prize! Since this award was given for Obama's words more than actions I think a better name for it would be the Nobel Speech Prize.

Obama has inspired hope and along with the encouragement of the Nobel Committee it is MY hope that he does take actions which will lead to more peace in the world.

I do think that the committee should have waited until Obama has lived up to more of his promises, ie: closing Guantanamo, securing nukes, actually ending the war in Iraq (not just replacing our troops with private military contractors), dealing with Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iran in a way that promotes peace, taking a more even handed approach and getting results in the Palestine/Israel conflict, he has a lot on his plate!

I also had to think that there must be people in the world who at this point are more deserving of the prize.

I hope he will live up to this honor. In order to do this he has a lot of work to do!

Post Script:

here is Obama's email regarding his award, it is a good one, check it out.

daniel --

This morning, Michelle and I awoke to some surprising and humbling news. At 6 a.m., we received word that I'd been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009.

To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize -- men and women who've inspired me and inspired the entire world through their courageous pursuit of peace.

But I also know that throughout history the Nobel Peace Prize has not just been used to honor specific achievement; it's also been used as a means to give momentum to a set of causes.

That is why I've said that I will accept this award as a call to action, a call for all nations and all peoples to confront the common challenges of the 21st century. These challenges won't all be met during my presidency, or even my lifetime. But I know these challenges can be met so long as it's recognized that they will not be met by one person or one nation alone.

This award -- and the call to action that comes with it -- does not belong simply to me or my administration; it belongs to all people around the world who have fought for justice and for peace. And most of all, it belongs to you, the men and women of America, who have dared to hope and have worked so hard to make our world a little better.

So today we humbly recommit to the important work that we've begun together. I'm grateful that you've stood with me thus far, and I'm honored to continue our vital work in the years to come.

Thank you,

President Barack Obama

Howard Zinn's reaction: less positive but a true and accurate perspective:

Nobel Prize for Promises?

Saturday 10 October 2009

by: Howard Zinn, t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed

(Photo: Wikimedia Commons)

I was dismayed when I heard Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize. A shock, really, to think that a president carrying on wars in two countries and launching military action in a third country (Pakistan), would be given a peace prize. But then I recalled that Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt and Henry Kissinger had all received Nobel Peace Prizes. The Nobel Committee is famous for its superficial estimates and for its susceptibility to rhetoric and empty gestures, while ignoring blatant violations of world peace.

Yes, Wilson gets credit for the League of Nations - that ineffectual body which did nothing to prevent war. But he also bombarded the Mexican coast, sent troops to occupy Haiti and the Dominican Republic and brought the US into the slaughterhouse of Europe in the first World War - surely, among stupid and deadly wars, at the top of the list.

Sure, Theodore Roosevelt brokered a peace between Japan and Russia. But he was a lover of war, who participated in the US conquest of Cuba, pretending to liberate it from Spain while fastening US chains around that tiny island. And as president he presided over the bloody war to subjugate the Filipinos, even congratulating a US general who had just massacred 600 helpless villagers in the Phillipines. The Committee did not give the Nobel Prize to Mark Twain, who denounced Roosevelt and criticized the war, nor to William James, leader of the anti-imperialist league.

Oh yes, the Committee saw fit to give a peace prize to Henry Kissinger, because he signed the final agreement ending the war in Vietnam, of which he had been one of the architects. Kissinger, who obsequiously went along with Nixon's expansion of the war with the bombing of peasant villages in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. Kissinger, who matches the definition of a war criminal very accurately, was given a peace prize!

People should not be given a peace prize on the basis of promises they have made (as with Obama, an eloquent maker of promises) but on the basis of actual accomplishments towards ending war. Obama has continued deadly, inhuman military action in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The Nobel Peace Committee should retire, and turn over its huge funds to some international peace organization which is not awed by stardom and rhetoric, and which has some understanding of history.

--------

Howard Zinn is a historian, playwright and social activist, and has received the Thomas Merton Award, the Eugene V. Debs Award, the Upton Sinclair Award and the Lannan Literary Award. He is perhaps best known for "A People's History of the United States."

still against the war, 8 years later

2009-10-07T18:34:00.000-07:00

Hi,
On this 8th anniversary of the beginning of the war in Afghanistan all I have to time to say is this:
I was against this war before it began and I am still against it! Bring all our troops (and private contractors) home NOW!
If you want to combat terrorism help people don't kill 'em. Build schools, hospitals, and farms don't bomb 'em. Simple really.
And don't let the Generals decide, war is good for them.
peace ya'll

Why Republicans win the debate

2009-09-17T10:50:00.000-07:00

There is no doubt that the Republicans and Conservatives in this country are better at the political game than the Democrats are and here is a few reasons why they tend to win the debate far more often than the Liberals and Progressives:
First - they make sure there is no debate
Second - the corporate media is on their side.
Third - they are united behind a singular agenda for which they are proud to not waiver
Fourth - They are not afraid to lie, they do it regularly, and the media (reason #2) allows them to get away with by in large.
Fifth - and most importantly perhaps, they know how to frame the debate.
sixth - they have big money behind them to get their word out and into the echo chamber that passes as media.
seventh - Their opponents in the debate do not play by the same rules and definitely do not play with the same heart and solidarity to one ideology.

First - they make sure there is no debate. By this I mean they are not interested in policy discussions - only shaping public opinion. (The democrats get bogged down in policy talk often)
examples:
1) the debates between Al Gore and G.W.Bush. Gore would bore everyone with a policy lecture and Bush would make a dumb joke - people liked the dumb joke so it seems.
2) the current health care debate - they do not offer alternative plans, just bad mouth the democrats plan and throw around labels like "communism" "socialism" "fascism", and people (some people) buy it.
3) The way the conservatives say the media has a liberal bias. They offer no evidence, fact is if you look at the statistics the opposite is true but they say it enough and people believe it. Like Bush said (I am paraphrasing) "You gotta say the truth over and over again before people will believe it"

Second - the corporate media is on their side. - This is what makes it possible for the conservatives to get away with all they do.
examples:
1) The media lets conservatives make claims, or they make them themselves, like "Obama has a deep seeded hatred for white people" - Glenn Beck, "All women wearing burqas want to slit your throat" - Michael Savage
2) The tea party protests and town hall meetings have a small percentage of people, organized by fake grass roots organizations, making ignorant false claims and they get covered by the media as if they are a legitimate grass roots movement without any analysis of who is behind them, while the millions of people who protested the Iraq war with legitimate concerns were largely ignored by the mainstream press, reported on back pages of the news paper, and dismissed by media commentators as clueless protesters who did not know why they were protesting.
3) During the lead up to the Iraq war on all the major news networks only 3 out of 400 experts interviewed expressed opinions questioning the war (and there were tons of prominent people expressing concerns whom they could have had on)

Third - they are united behind a singular agenda for which they are proud to not waiver - (while the Democrats have a big tent of opinions and rarely unite behind any one agenda)
examples:
1) Almost always the Republicans vote in a united block. Most Democratic legislation gets a couple republican votes at most. The Republicans in this congress have filibustered (or threatened to which is enough to stop the spineless Dems) more than any congress in history.
2) The republicans are not shy about wanting to take away oversight of corporations, reduce environmental and labor laws, increase the use of the military, attack abortion, immigrants, gays, reduce taxes for the rich and corporations, expand free trade, etc.
3) When the Republicans do something they label themselves as being American and patriotic for doing it and if the Dems try to stop them then they are labeled "unamerican" and "obstructionists" but when the Dems want to do something then the Republicans say they are destroying America and they say that they are being patriotic by obstructing them. They manage to frame the debate like this even when the majority of Americans support the democratic efforts (such as health care or environmental laws).

Fourth - They are not afraid to lie, they do it regularly, and the media (reason #2) allows them to get away with by in large.
examples:
1) Sarah Palin and her Death Panel comment. Absolutely ridiculous claim and yet Michael Steele, head of the RNC said it was accurate, one of the Republicans on the Baucus committee to write the Senate Health Care plan said it was a concern. And the media in large part let all this happen.
2) Um the lead up to the Iraq war? Lies, Lies and more Lies
3) Rep Joseph Wilson's comment "You Lie" - and the Republicans stand by it, of course Obama was telling the truth and there is even language in the plan to prove it.
4) Honestly most things the Republicans say, the opposite is true, and if the media did their job this would be exposed more often.

Fifth - and most importantly perhaps, they know how to frame the debate. They are masters of the political sound bite and have the ability to pull the debate far to the right just by the way they frame it.
examples:
1) current health care debate: "socialism" this has been a word used to slander the Democratic plan to provide affordable health care. People do not even understand what this means, it just sounds bad the way it is said. Half the time the say fascism or something which is completely different.
2) They have framed the Public Option as a far left idea. The far left idea was Single Payer (which was actually had wide support). The Public Option was the compromise between that and what the Republicans want - pure private system (what we have), but all of a sudden by claiming the public option is this socialist crazy idea the compromise is becoming some coop or something less than a public option.
3) Reagan had the original frame of "the government is the problem" . This frame has stuck and keeps getting repeated, even though it makes no sense. It of course is as self fulfilling prophecy for the republicans as they do all they can to ruin the government.
4) the Republicans nominated EXTREME right supreme court judges - Alito and Roberts. When the Dems raised questions they were labeled obstructionists and threatened with the "nuclear option" if they filibustered. Then Obama nominates a centrist (Sotomayor) and they freak out saying she is so far left.

sixth - they have big money behind them to get their word out and into the echo chamber that passes as media. This is self explanatory - say it enough times and people believe it.

seventh - Their opponents in the debate do not play by the same rules and definitely do not play with the same heart and solidarity to one ideology.
examples:
1)the dems are spineless. They compromise before they go to the table! They took Single Payer off the table because they knew they could not get it and now they may not even get a public option. This despite the fact that the majority of Americans wanted it. Why can't they stand strong behind what their party stands for?
2) They took impeachment off the table for Bush/Cheney before hearings were even conducted. And Bush/Cheney probably broke a dozen impeachable laws. The Republicans Impeached Clinton over a blow job and a lie about it.
3) there are progressive Dems who believe in Single Payer, Fair trade, and no War and conservative Dems who believe in Free Trade, private health care, and all wars. this makes the dems truly representative of the American Public but also it make them often unable to all agree on a topic.
This is super frustrating. If, for example the Dems are not successful in reforming health care, the media will say that they may suffer in the next election for it. Implying the Republicans might win more seats. The Republicans have derailed any health care reform for this very reason. The logical outcome to a derailed health care reform attempt would be to get rid of more of the Republicans and get more Democrats so enough Dems can agree on something to get it done.

Robert F. Kennedy on what GNP means.

2009-09-14T17:43:00.001-07:00

Robert F. Kennedy on what GNP means.

Below is a quote from Bobby Kennedy on what the Gross National Product means and more importantly what it does not mean. He would have a made a fine economist...

"Too much and too long, we seem to have surrendered community excellence and community values in the mere accumulation of material things. Our gross national product ... if we should judge America by that - counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage. It counts special locks for our doors and the jails for those who break them. It counts the destruction of our redwoods and the loss of our natural wonder in chaotic sprawl. It counts napalm and the cost of a nuclear warhead, and armored cars for police who fight riots in our streets. It counts Whitman's rifle and Speck's knife, and the television programs which glorify violence in order to sell toys to our children.

"Yet the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education, or the joy of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages; the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. It measures neither our wit nor our courage; neither our wisdom nor our learning; neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country; it measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile. And it tells us everything about America except why we are proud that we are Americans."

Robert F. Kennedy Address, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, March 18, 1968

Big Oil and Racism take out Van Jones

2009-09-08T19:19:00.000-07:00

Well the news was disheartening. A local (and international) hero of the sustainability and human rights issues was unfairly taken out by the right wing political machine.
Van Jones, co-founder of the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights and Green For All and author of the best seller The Green Collar Economy, had been tapped by the Obama administration to be an advisor on green jobs and sustainable energy. Time magazine had named Van one of the world's 100 most influential people (see their write up about him HERE)

Unfortunately the first time most of the nation has heard his name in main stream media was recently when he was forced to resign. Americans For Prosperity (a fake grass roots organization funded by big oil) began the witch hunt for Van Jones. It was brought to a wider audience when Glenn Beck took towards smearing Van as a communist, black nationalist, crazy.

This is upsetting on so many levels.

First Van Jones is an amazing guy who has dedicated himself to bettering this country like few have. Glenn Beck is a lying racist pig who should be locked up, not in a position of influence over information or politics. After saying Obama has a deep hatred for white people, Glen Beck's program lost some of its advertising sponsorship. This happened after an organization Van Jones helped to start, called on advertisers to boycott his show. Walmart among others pulled their ads. Glenn beck continually railed against Van as an example of the crazy black guys that Obama surrounds himself with. The message: THEY are taking your country away and we have to stop them!

His evidence was a petition Van signed which called for an investigation into 9/11 to see if high officials of our government were responsible. This petition was signed by many progressives such as Noam Chomsky and Thomm Hartman as well as many families of the victims of the September 11 attacks. Van and others say they did not agree with the final wording of the petition and that it did not reflect their personal views on the issue.

The other evidence thrown around were statements taken out of context where Van said Republicans are assholes. He went on to say he too can sometimes be an asshole. He also apologized for the statement, unlike President Bush who called members of the press assholes and said he regretted people heard him say that but refused to apologize.

If calling someone an asshole is enough to keep you out of Washington I doubt many would be there.

After Fox "News" and Glenn Beck's hammering and the pushing from dirty energy companies, some Republicans actually called for a hearing into Van Jones' past behaviour.

So he resigned rather than draw negative attention to Obama or the issue of Green Jobs.

Troubling point number two. A strong, positive voice for change goes to Washington and the racist conservative talk show hosts and the crooked politicians who's pockets are lined with oil and blood drenched money have the power to take them down. And the Democrats, who are supposed to be the alternative to the Republican party, can't even stand up and defend that voice. It may be true that politically it was the best move to let Van go, but morally?

If anything is to change we need Democrats in the white house and leadership that will take on the Glenn Becks and the Americans for Prosperity of this world and expose them for what they are. Lying, racist, extremists who are promoting dangerous hatred and are only harming this country. Their actions should be considered treason. With free speech comes responsibility and when that responsibility is abused at least their microphone should be taken away. And the Obama administration, following a long trend, allowed the target of the right to be thrown under the bus, rather than to stand up and defend what he knows is right. This weakness may not serve him in the end as the conservatives have walked all over his attempt to reform health care.

Troubling point number three: Money has such influence in Washington that true health care reform, energy reform, you name it, can not happen as long as politicians are concerned with raising money for their campaigns. We see this in the current failure to get any real health care reform. What the politicians finally call reform will be drafted carefully as not to piss off the Insurance Industry as they are the ones who pay for the politicians re-election campaigns.

Solutions:

Get the money out of politics before we can fix this country.

Fight the racist conservative backlash to Obama's presidency any way you can.

Read the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights' comment on Van Jones resignation HERE and sign their petition regarding green collar jobs HERE

recent letter the editor of Sac Bee

2009-08-21T08:19:00.001-07:00

I had to cut a third of this letter out to get it down to 200 words but here is a letter I whipped out last night so I could sleep after reading an idiotic commentary.

Dear Editor,
I just received the viewpoints page from Saturday August 15th in the mail from my grandfather who has subscribed to the Bee for years. I was blown away by the commentary by Rich Lowry regarding what he calls a grass roots populist movement against ‘Obamacare’.
I would like to thank Rich for making a very accurate comparison between the political right and left in this country. He said, “The same distrust of power that had the left-wing activists spinning feverish theories about George W. Bush’s eavesdropping has the right agitated about Obama’s death panels.”
This illustrates the difference between the left and right extremely well. The left protested when Bush spied on Americans. It was a real policy, which the left had serious intellectual issues with (like the fact that it was illegal and against our Bill of Rights). Now the right is making a fuss at town hall meetings over death panels, which do not exist. The idea of death panels is a complete lie invented by the right wing to control the uneducated in this country, using their old stand by: fear. (They used fear to explain why they had to eavesdrop on Americans as well).
The idea of death panels grew out of an amendment to include end of life counseling for people that was introduced by a Republican senator in fact. Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, and Michael Steel have all supported this lie.
So the left was upset for things the Republicans actually did and the right is upset over what the Republicans untruthfully say the Democrats are doing.
Thank you Rich for pointing out the difference between the activists at either end of the political spectrum. Now if only the rest of what you said had a grain of truth in it.

Danny Boyer
Half Moon Bay, CA

the insane fight over health care

2009-07-28T20:40:00.000-07:00

I wrote this blog a few weeks ago and did not feel finished as I wanted to continue my rant. As it happens I just moved and am starting a new job so I no longer have time to continue this rant so I will leave it as is. Recent developments of course have me even more crazy over this issue, to be super brief:

The Republicans will go to any length to make Obama fail and health care is the current battle ground. They could care less for this country. They are using lies and scare tactics (like Obama's death councils that are going to kill granny) and doing it boldly and proudly. Without a real main stream media they get away with it. They care only about politics, their own power, and profits for the uber rich corporate class.

Obama needs to stand up to these tyrants and bully's. Call him and tell him what you think! (202) 456-1111. Tell him you want a public option. Medicare for anyone who wants it. Call your members of congress as well at: (202) 224-3121.

check these websites: patriotmajority.com and sickforprofit.com

The CEO for United Health care gets a $3.2 million salary and has 3/4 of a billion dollars in stock options! This is the problem with our system.

This fight goes far beyond health care, it addresses the underlying ideological fight of progressives vs conservatives: Should the government work for individuals or corporations? We could get into this on many levels but the fact is our system breeds poverty and what the conservatives call socialism is what actually allows a vibrant middle class to flourish.

ok I will just let you read my original blog as I must now go..

So the Health Care debate continues and it drives me crazy. We are not likely to get a true reform of our health care industry but it is a very interesting study of the power of the Republicans and corporate lobbyists and will show us just how weak Obama is as a President. The world health organization rates the US health care system 37th in the world, at least 75% of Americans want a public option to compete with the private insurance companies, one of the main topics during the campaign for President was health care reform, the Democratic party (the ones in charge supposedly) has adopted universal health care as a party platform, over 60% of personal bankruptcies are due to medical bills (and many of those people had health insurance), and health care costs are crippling businesses and individuals alike. Yet it seems there is not the political will to make the changes needed.

I am already on the record as saying the only real solution is a single payer solution such as Canada and Europe has. Payed for by everyone through taxes. Private insurance companies can still exist to sell additional insurance as they do in Canada. Unfortunately this option is off the table so the next best thing is a public option of some sort.

The Republicans are united against a public option. They have stated on the record that they want to stop health care reform for political reasons. They want Obama to fail and will do anything they can to make that happen. They are also firm believers that the government cannot do anything right and we should let private industry do it all. This of course should disqualify them from working int he government! If someone wanted to work for a company and they said they believe that that company could not do anything right, would they get hired? They not only want a public option to fail, they want Obama to fail in everything he does. And to get their way they are offering lies, lies, and more lies. They say they "do not do policy" when asked for their alternative plan, only that they want to set a tone the will defeat health care reform. The whole argument of having a bureaucrat between you and your doctor is crazy. All the senators and congress people have a health care system payed for by tax payers and none of them are complaining about their health care. They like it but warn us that we not want it. Of course having an insurance company between you and your doctor is worse, they make money by denying people coverage. And this fact is incredibly well documented with numerous whistle blowers coming out recently. Check out Robert Greenwald's latest five minute film: sick for profit

The medical industry has spent 3.4 billion dollars in the past decade lobbying congress, second only to the financial industry. A list of the biggest recipients of money from these companies is the same as the list of people who are against a public option (democrats included). So here we see where the loyalty lies. Corporate America or the American people. %100 of Republicans so far are against the people and for the corporations. it seems so far about 10 or 20 percent of the Democrats are in the same boat. Which means the corporations may win this round.

Now who gets the blame? This is interesting. The media seems to say that the Dems have 60 seats in the senate so if this doesn't pass it is their fault. But that means 100% of Dems need to agree! None can vote against it because they want single payer and none because they are batting for the insurance companies. That is not democracy. Say 80% of dems are for it and 0% of republicans are, who should get the blame? In my opinion the Republicans should be banned from government since they do not believe it works. If we had moslty Dems in office then they could work it out among themselves and the most liberal and most conservative could bow out on any one issue and things would still get done.

Now how bad are the Democrats at the game of politics? The Republicans are the minority, the Dems have the White House, and at least 75% of Americans back the Democratic plan and yet the Republicans still seem to be able to call the shots. Worse yet, the dems have adopted over 100 Republicans amendments to the Health Reform Bill in the House in order to be bipartisan and gain Republican support yet the Republicans still are against it. And if their party openly says they want it to fail then why should they get to help craft the law? I understand some conservative Democrats are against this as well. Well it is a platform of their party and if Obama cannot get them to give a little on this issue then he is a weak president. Hell, he needs to endorse someone else in their primaries who will work with the Democrats on important issues. And they need to tell the Republicans to go to hell with their amendments! They should craft a bill that the American people want, vote on it, and then if it fails go to the people and tell them get rid of all those who voted against it so the next time they can get it done.

Of course the bigger issue is campaign finance. If we took away the right of any corporation to finance politicians then they would truly have only the voters to answer to. Hell, in three days they OK's 800 billion dollars for the financial bailout but cannot find money to pay for health care. And these banks that got bailed out are now making record profits and paying their CEOs 100s of millions of dollars in salaries again. Just crazy.

Call your congressmen/women and your senators. Tell them you want a public option and you will vote against them if they vote against it. Call the White House and tell Obama he better use his muscle and not cower down to these slimy Republicans who fight only with lies and untruths and who have came out and said they want this to fail so it will be Obama's Waterloo.

This is truly an ideological battle. One that goes beyond how much we are paying for health care. Do we want a government that works for the people or for the corporations and top 1%? Since Reagan took power this country has been literally falling apart while the very rich concentrate the wealth in their off shore accounts.

sotomayor, republicans, and the press

2009-07-15T19:36:00.000-07:00

Well I have enjoyed listening to the Sotomayor hearings when I can. It is an interesting window into our judicial system as well as our elected officials.

Of course Sotomayor is an incredible nominee and is a good middle of the road candidate.

What has been most striking to me is how the republicans keep making twisted accusations and how the press gives credibility to them. I noticed in an online article that they quoted Jeff Sessions' complaint that she is biased and racist but never said anything about who Sessions is. Media Maters has a great article discussing this exact thing. Sessions was denied a spot as a federal judge (even by republicans) because he himself is a racist. Pot calling the kettle black but do any of the major media sources mention this when giving his twisted attacks credibility? No. You can read the original at the link below or just read the excerpt I included below which sums it up.

Another ridiculous point they are trying to make is that Obama's "empathy" standard is bad. One of the Republicans actually said that by having empathy for someone you must in turn be prejudiced against another group. He said therefor if you are empathetic you are by definition prejudiced. Obviously he has no idea what it means to be empathetic.

Another insight into Republican ideology came when one of the Republicans used his time to make points on two issues: guns and abortion. He went on and on about how important the 2nd amendment is and how he is worried that cities, etc may make laws pertaining to gun use and he also grandstanded against abortion. Funny, seems like he arguing we should make laws to protects unborn lives but is in the same breath arguing against laws to protect the lives of others. And are these even the two most important issues facing us today? Or is he just pandering to his loyal base?

the interesting article and many others:

http://mediamatters.org/research/200907140058

SUMMARY: On July 14, five major newspapers reported on Jeff Sessions' opening statement at the confirmation hearing of Judge Sonia Sotomayor without noting that, in 1986, Sessions' nomination as a U.S. district court judge was rejected following allegations that Sessions had a history of making racially charged comments.

67 Comments

On July 14, the nation's five major newspapers reported Sen. Jeff Sessions' (R-AL) opening statement at the confirmation hearing of Judge Sonia Sotoamyor without reporting in that day's print editions that, in 1986, the Senate Judiciary Committee rejected Sessions' nomination as a U.S. district court judge following testimony that reportedly included allegations that Sessions had a history of making racially charged comments. In addition, as noted by the Associated Press, Sessions' "nomination originally drew fire from civil rights groups because of his [1985] prosecution ... of three west Alabama civil rights activists on vote fraud charges. The three were acquitted by a federal court jury, prompting civil rights leaders to charge that the prosecution was an attempt to intimidate black voters."

Media Matters reviewed the coverage in the July 14 print editions of The New York Times, The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, USA Today, and The Wall Street Journal.

In a June 6, 1986, report about the Judiciary Committee's rejection of Sessions' nomination, the AP described the allegations:

All eight Democrats on the committee voted against Sessions on both motions, as did Sen. Charles Mathias, R-Md. Another Republican on the panel, Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, voted against recommending the nomination favorably but voted for sending the nomination to the full Senate with no recommendation.

[...]

The nomination originally drew fire from civil rights groups because of his prosecution last year of three west Alabama civil rights activists on vote fraud charges.

The three were acquitted by a federal court jury, prompting civil rights leaders to charge that the prosecution was an attempt to intimidate black voters to help ensure Denton's re-election.

Sessions denied those charges and defended the prosecution during his first appearance before the Judiciary Committee in March. But he soon faced new allegations that he had made a series of racially insensitive statements.

Witnesses accused Sessions of calling a black lawyer a "boy," of describing church and civil rights groups as "un-American," of agreeing with a statement that a white civil rights lawyer was a "disgrace to his race," and of saying he thought the Ku Klux Klan was all right until he learned members smoked marijuana.

Obama/Congress missing the point on healthcare

2009-06-09T08:53:00.000-07:00

While our politicians push for a health care plan of some sorts we are provided with an example of how messed up our political system is and an example of a time when each and every one if us has a responsibility to take part in our democracy and contact our elected employees.

The fact that a single payer health care system is not even being considered for a place at the table of discussion is the biggest problem. Then we have the whole debate over a public option. Our current health care system is driving individuals bankrupt (even with insurance) and making businesses shoulder a financial burden that often makes them unable to compete with all the other countries that have national health care.

I heard Obama speak very misleadingly today. He said "everyone" has been invited to the table to discuss possible health care plans. That is BS. I am sad that Obama is proving to be more of a politician than a visionary, not surprised but sad none the less. He once advocated for single payer and now he considers the idea dead on arrival.

The fact is, according to a number of polls, the majority of Doctors, Nurses, and Americans want a single payer system. It as least deserves a place at the table.

Harvard medical researcher David Himmelstein and Rose Ann DeMoro of the California Nurses Association are both leading advocates of single payer health care. These two health care experts must have an opinion worth discussing, wouldn't you say?

Yet when Senator Max Baucus (D-Montana) held health care reform hearings before the Senate Finance Committee which he chairs, he said "he would not waste his time" with discussion of single payer. He had 41 people testify during the hearings, zero in favor of single payer. 13 doctors and nurses protested and got arrested during the hearings, leading to public outcry which has pressured Baucus to ask charges be dropped against the 13 and to meet with Himmelstein, DeMoro and others.

Interestingly enough Baucus has received the most money from the insurance industry out of every Democrat in congress. The for profit medical industry has given hundreds of millions of dollars to members of congress in campaign contributions (read legal bribes).

A recent study by the American Journal of Medicine showed 62% of private bankruptcies in this country were due to health care costs (Up 20% from 2001) and 80% of these people HAD HEALTH INSURANCE! So obviously something is wrong.

The fact is the cost of health care in this country is crippling. Not just the middle and lower class but it is crippling business as well. GM just went bankrupt. We are the only major auto producing nation without a national health care system. One idea being floated by our politicians is making employers provide health care. How will that spur business growth. $1000 of the cost of every car made in America goes to health care of employees. My school has 50 employees and at $400 each pays about $20,000 a month in health insurance! Imagine companies like Halliburton with 50,000 employees - that would be $20 million dollars a month. Of course this will provide more motivation to move companies over seas or to hire part time, low wage workers to get around providing health care.

Having private insurance companies act as middle men with the sole purpose of extracting profit makes no sense when we all agree people and business cannot afford our health care. CEOs of insurance companies are getting billions of dollars while citizens and businesses are being driven into bankruptcy.

The republicans are joining in mass against the idea that Obama has that we should allow private insurance companies to exist but also allow people to buy into a government run medicare type system. They are against this type of competition because they say the insurance companies will not be able to compete. Doesn't THAT in itself tell you something about the whole debate.
People may argue that the republicans will not support single payer but they will fight against anything the Dems do. They have shown that over and over, look at their public reaction to Sotomayor - a middle of the road extremely qualified nominee to the supreme court. And look at their opposition to a government run option. I say if single payer gets a place at the table, if the numbers are crunched on Bernie Sanders' and John Conyers' single payer proposals and they make sense, and the people and the doctors and the nurses want it, then let the republicans obstruct it and then lets get rid of the republicans in the next election.

The proposals that Obama and the Congress are considering are in fact experimental adjustments to an already messed up system. Fact is the single payer system is one that we have models of all over the world - and ask any of those countries - Canada, France, Germany, Taiwan, Sweden, Denmark - if they would like to switch to a for profit system.
Those who argue that "the government can't do anything right" or "that the private sector can do things better" are arguing, I guess, that the American government is less capable than other governments. Funny the same people who argue our government cannot do things right feel we need to be the leaders of the free world, by force if necessary.

If we truly want to fix health care then single payer is the only way to do it. Some say the public option being discussed is a step towards national health care because eventually everyone will chose the cheaper option. Proponents and opponents both make this claim. The problem with this is how are we gonna pay for it? Think about schools. we have a public option and it sucks, money keeps getting cut from it and it cannot compete to the private schools that take in tons of money from wealthy families. Of course those private schools for the most part are run as non profits so they are not funneling billions out of the system. But still. The argument goes that if EVERYONE went to public school and payed for it through taxes then we would have better public schools. It would be hard to make this happen now because the system is in place. But with health care we are starting from scratch, or should be. If everyone could have access to single payer health care and everyone payed for it it would cost less than our current insurance does. But I worry about an underfunded "option" that becomes what the public schools are to education in this country.

So you have senators and representatives in the House so get on the email or phone and let them know what you think, if you think that is.

here's a link to do it: http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/

Tortured logic

2009-05-22T13:09:00.000-07:00

Well I cannot believe we are actually debating in this country whether or not we should torture people. But talking with a friend the other day who seemed to think it was a difficult question to answer made me think I gotta weigh in on this one.

The argument is usually broken down into two separate questions: Is Torture wrong? and Does Torture work? The proponents of torture seem to imply that if it works then the first question is null and void. The ends justifies the means. Ironically by their own logic if it does not work then the first question does not matter for there would be no reason to torture. Most of the opponents to torture address it from the first question saying it is wrong so it does not matter whether or not it works. But of course there are many opponents who also point out that it does not work well anyway.

The reason I cannot believe we are having this debate is that torture is wrong AND it does not work. So where is the debate? Oh yeah, Dick Cheney is out there running his mouth that torture is necessary to keep us safe. Don't get me started on Dick! Is he really the voice of reason? (I gotta just point out ex-democratic vice president Al Gore is out talking about stopping global climate change while Cheney is out defending torture.)

So is it wrong? Well according to international law, US law, and military law, it is illegal. Our Army's field manual on interrogation prohibits it. Our government has prosecuted others for water boarding our soldiers. In past wars we have took pride that we treat our prisoners of war humanely and according to international law. Hell, Saddam's "torture chambers" were sighted as evidence that he was an "evil doer" and he needed to be removed from power. I am no lawyer but I do know that the interpretation of our law is based on precedents set by prior legal cases that have gone to court. By this process there is no doubt that things like water boarding is against the law. Bush/Cheney had lawyers write up opinions that it is legal to do things like water boarding. These "lawyers" - Yoo, Bybee, Gonzales based these opinions on what precedents?

Plus look at the fact we locked up some of the "bad apples" who carried out the torture. These are men and women who were low ranking military personnel. They tortured and we put them in jail. So it must be wrong.

Any way I think there is plenty of history that shows even in this country we considered torture illegal and wrong.

But does it work? This is the question some think could justify the use of torture even though it is wrong. Perhaps the way they spin it, is that it is not wrong if it saves lives. Well that is a matter of opinion I suppose.

First even the government agrees that 90% of those held in places like Guantanamo are innocent. So we are torturing innocent people. And incidentally we are hiring private contractors to do it, but that is another rant entirely.

Second, even if torture works, the logic of the 'ends justifies the means' only works if there are no other means by which to get to the same end. And in fact this is the elephant in the room. There are other ways to interrogate people that work. In fact testimony before the senate a week or so ago by an FBI interrogator named Ali Soufan who is the chief witness in two of the main terrorism trials since 9/11 gave a damning testimony of torture as a interrogation technique. He said they got good info from suspects like Abu Zubaydah until the torture began and that the torture actually hindered their investigations into terrorism. In fact Soufan said Zubaydah was cooperative until he was tortured and then he stopped cooperating. He said that they have advanced interrogation techniques that work incredibly well and fast. He said they got important information from Zubaydah in one hour through advanced mind games. He pointed out that, not only are terrorists trained to resist torture and the info you get is unreliable because people will say anything, but it takes too long. If you have to water board someone 89 times in a month to get info that is slow and useless if you are trying to save lives. Torturing people for years, what does that do for us? Many CIA and FBI interrogators resigned when they were told to stop using their effective methods and to start torturing.

Plus what evidence you get from torture cannot be used in a court of law. This means even if people are guilty of terrorism we may not be able to prosecute them because we got the evidence through torture.

Many people, including Soufan, make the point also that torture has been used around the world, not to get actionable intelligence (for they all know there are better ways) but it is used to get people to lie. When governments want false testimony they can use to support their agenda of war or whatever they torture people to get them to say what they want. In fact Soufan said the techniques used by the contractors in the case of Zubaydah were Cold War-era communist techniques used by the Chinese during the Korean war to illicit false testimonies from American pilots. This has also been used by police to get false confessions from suspects (especially blacks in this country back in the days of lynching and beyond I am sure). For most people will eventually say anything you want them to say to get the torture to stop. This is why torture was so good for Cheney and gang for they were trying to get confessions linking Saddam to Al Qaida. This is why confessions by people who were tortured are not submittable in a court of law. And this is why our government does not want our detainees in the war on terror to be tried in a court of law, hence the military tribunals.

Even if torture works and therefore we think it is OK. Our main objective is to make Americans safe. Well I submit that when the world sees us torturing people, many innocent, mostly Muslim we become much less safe. Terrorism feeds on hatred and what better Al Qaida advertising slogan than "they tortured your brother, now what are you gonna do about it?"

So to end this rant. From the arguments I have heard torture is not the best way to get good intelligence, it does not work and there are other methods that are better and faster even if you do get some info from torture. And torture is illegal and wrong and we should not be having an argument about it, we should be prosecuting those nuts who said it is legal and who keep running their mouths that is something we should do.

Oh, and I never even got into the fact of how mad I was when I read in the paper that this whole torture debate and the stink between Pelosi and the CIA could discredit Pelosi and Obama to the point that they may not be able to do what they had hoped to do to fix our health care system! Boy the republicans are expert obstructionists! Come on folks, torture is wrong, the CIA has been dishonest since Cheney was a schoolyard bully, get over it and lets move on. Or on the other hand, lets run with Pelosi's idea of a truth commission on torture and lets find out who said to do what and if we don't lock 'em up, let's at least ban them from government and Sunday morning talk shows.

Obama's three Big Mistakes

2009-04-02T20:36:00.000-07:00

Ok, so I must first say that I still like Obama as a leader. He has done great things in all areas. Of course for the environment he is right on track: giving scientists and environmentalists a place at the table in decision making and taking their advice; allowing the EPA to declare greenhouses gasses hazardous giving them regulatory control over them; setting aside vast natural areas. In the military he has ended the stop loss program, increased funding for veterans health care, took a stand against torture, ordered Guantanamo closed.

And I must say he is doing what he said he would do. I guess I was hoping he would be more progressive than that.

And I must say that if we want him to be more progressive we need to put the pressure on! Heat the streets! He has pressure from the top, we need to stand up and be heard as well!

I see him failing to produce CHANGE in three of the most important areas: health care, the economy, and war. Small changes in the above areas yes! Compared to Bush even big changes. But he has not produced fundamental change in the way America does its business. Many may think that is good, an American president should do business the American way. But it is so obvious that in all three of those areas the fundamentals of the American way are failing. They are utter failures. Our military policy creates more enemies, our economic policy creates more poverty, and our health care system makes people sick. I was HOPING Obama was smart enough to see these things but so far he seems to be acting on the advice from all the wrong people.

I will briefly explain what I mean in these three cases.

1) Health Care:
Obama had 150 "experts" on health care hold a summit on our health care system. He had no one invited who supported a single payer system, even though a single payer system is arguably the most inexpensive way to provide health care to everyone and is also in some poles
the most popular solution among Americans. I think it is clearly the best solution but even if you disagree it deserves a spot at the table. Obama, under pressure, did end up with two single payer advocates at his meeting.

Interestingly enough when he was a state senator he said single payer was the best solution to our health care problem and could articulate why. So why his change? He seems unwilling or unable to address the root cause of the health care problem in this country, the insurance companies. It make no sense to have middle men inserting themselves between patients and medicine with the sole purpose of making a profit. They are there to suck money out of the system, as much as they can. Now making a living is one thing and there is still perhaps a place for some sort of insurance companies. But when the CEOs and such are making millions or even billions in profit there is something wrong.

If you don't think it is wrong then think of it this way. If it turns out health care is too expensive for people or for employers or for the taxpayers (whoever pays for it) and we need to figure out how to make it less expensive does it not make sense to stop people from extracting billions of dollars from the system? It is as if we have a bucket of water with a giant hole in it. We all now realize that there is not enough water in our bucket but we refuse to fix the hole because the hole thinks it has a right to exist. (and the hole is giving much of the water it steals to the politicians who make the decisions)

A single payer system would save people money, companies money, and the government money. It would reduce the profits of the insurance companies. It would also reduce the profits from the pharmaceutical companies that also make billions in profit.

Of course one of the arguments is that if pharmaceutical companies can't make tons of money then they won't do the research for new drugs. This is a sham since the research is done often with government money by scientists who are probably rarely driven by money (they aren't getting the CEO's pay). It is the classic American way - nationalize the losses (research and cost of health care) and privatize the profits (concentrated in the top 1%)

I would say we need to go one step further and reevaluate health care for profit in the first place. If any industry should be nonprofit driven shouldn't it be providing health care for people? Now of course nonprofit can still provide a good living wage for the providers, hell pay the top doctors and CEOs half a million dollars, but let's be reasonable! Or pay off their medical school debt and then pay them a normal good salary. Or start with new doctors by giving them free medical school so they don't have the bruden of debt and then have them work for a reasonable salary, like the rest of us. Stop allowing people (the top 1% who don't need it) to suck off billions in profit while others (who do need it) are not able to afford health care.

so fundamental change number one that Obama is missing: a single payer health care system that provides affordable health care for EVERYONE, takes the burden of health care costs off employers (something the business community should be behind!), and actually saves the government money in the end by having a healthier more productive group of citizens who can contribute more to the country and spend less time in emergency rooms, while at the same time providing a competitive innovative environment in which doctors and nurses can thrive and medical advances are made and celebrated.

2) The economy

Some of the same problems as with health care, in fact the same problem. We all want goods and services, why do we have people inserting themselves in the middle and extracting billions in profit? It makes no sense. It is out of control. Just look at the CEO pay and bonuses for the failed banks. These banks lost more money than any companies in the history of the world and yet the people in charge got BONUSES! In fact these people and their system have caused a global economic collapse possibly like never seen before.

Obama is missing his opportunity for real change here too. Instead of real change he is pumping tax payer money into the broken system. Banks are getting bigger not smaller. The bucket is so full of holes that it holds no water. Obama is trying to just pour the water faster into the bucket, maybe from a different angle, but the results are going to be the same - a lot of wasted water! Even if he pours fast enough to keep the bucket filled, the amount of water he needs is mind boggling, and when he stops pouring the holes are still there. Why not ditch the bucket and give the water directly to the people who are waiting for water from the bucket?

Ditch these banks that are sucking off the money, get rid of the mismanaging middle men and then use the money to give the loans and things that we say the banks need to do. Force the CEOs to renegotiate their contracts (or just fire them) like we force the union workers in the auto industry to do. It is insane.

So the bigger picture is this. Obama is trying to fix the existing system. But the existing system is a failure. Nonprofit health care, try a nonprofit economy! Stick with me here.

Our profit driven capitalistic society based on neocapitalism and unregulated markets and free trade relies on constant growth. A company needs to grow, profits need to grow, production needs to grow. CEO pay grows at an exponential rate! Now it is a basic law of nature that in a closed system you cannot have continued growth forever. In the human body that is called cancer. In ecology it leads to over population and mass death. In a balloon it leads to a pop! never ending growth is not sustainable.

We have gotten away with it because we have exploited natural resources at an increasing rate without running out of them quite yet (but soon we will- fish, water, oil, trees). The system also exploits workers to maximize profits for those at the top. This is the real crime of free trade. We cannot see the exploitation if it takes place on the other side of the world. We all have products made by children, slaves, and desperate people, that's a fact.

So what about a nonprofit system of 'capitalism' where companies made things and provided services and people could chose which ones they want but the goal of the companies was to provide a good living wage for its employees, make a great living wage for the boss or entrepreneur who made it happen, and to be sustainable so it can continue to operate without hurting its ability to do the same thing some time in the future.

Pay a living wage and stop letting the top 1% from extracting billions from the system!

This could be called democratic socialism. It makes perfect sense. Use resources in a nation to benefit everyone in while having a truly democratic system of governing. Rather than having a system like we do where the top 1% get 90% of the money from the nations resources and maintain control of the government while a large percentage of the population do not even have a comfortable life.

Fundamental change Obama is missing number 2:
Addressing the real problems with our modern American form of capitalistic exploitation which redistributes wealth up to the top 1% at an ever increasing rate, making it impossible to be sustainable in the long term, guaranteeing more collapses and failures in the future. It cannot work forever so why not fix it now!

3) War

Obama has failed miserably here in my mind but he has not done anything differently than he said he would.

He talked so much shit against Bush's wars that he sounded like an anti-war candidate. Compared to Bush,Cheney, and McCain he is an anti war candidate I guess, at least he is only expanding old wars rather than starting new ones. But he is not the peace candidate, never was. Too bad! That may be his downfall in the end, who knows.

So what I think he is missing is the chance to show the world that WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER. At least not the answer to terrorism. Killing people (millions) , bombing weddings, destroying towns and cities, and occupying countries that do not belong to us does not decrease terrorism in the world! Besides the fact that we are now the cause of much of the terror, our actions are the perfect recruiting tool for terrorists. We are increasing the hatred with every bomb we drop, every child we kill, every drone that terrorises a territory in which we don't belong.

Obama missed his chance to say, these were Bush's wars. These wars were the brainchilds of the right wing neocon hawks. They are war mongers, war criminals, and should never hold any public office again. He missed his chance to show the world a different way. He should have discredited the whole premise of the war on terror. Invading countries with overwhelming military force. This is a destabilizing action.

So Obama's pull out of Iraq leaves 40 or 50 thousand troops there? The terrorists will love that. Increasing the foreign occupation of Afghanistan (infamous for their hatred of foreign occupiers) spreading the war to Pakistan, to a region of tribal warrior people who cannot even be controlled by their own government who speaks their languages and knows their customs. How do we expect to control them? Change them? Make them not hate us? Oh, predator drones bombing weddings, good idea. Billions of military aid for the Pakistani army - good idea!

What I think Obama should have done: Pull out of everywhere Bush went, completely. Say sorry, Bush is an lying idiot. A bungling fool. A war criminal. The people there have lived together and fought each other for 1000s of years, we do not need to add our killers to the mix. Then after pulling out, show the world the new American way to fight terrorism: Work with governments and local groups to provide people in areas of concern with things they want. In Pakistan do the locals really want us to kill all the Taliban? No, the Taliban are their brothers, sons, dads, neighbors. Do they want us to bring them democracy, McDonald's, and Disneyland? I doubt it but if that is what they ask for then we can help them get it, through peaceful means. We did not have to bomb South Africa to help end the terrorist Apartheid system.

The people in Pakistan and elsewhere would probably love to have schools (read Three Cups of Tea if you think not!), water, medical clinics, solar power, whatever. Help them get it. To say we could not do this is ridiculous. If we put as much effort into giving away solar panels and schools as we do into developing and deploying state of the art warfare we could. And who would argue that the chances of terrorists wanting to go to the trouble to bomb us would be greater if we helped people rather than if we hurt people.

You can do an experiment: walk down the street. Give some people gifts and smiles, give others punches and snarls, now which ones act violently back at you? Simple isn't it.

Now people will argue that the Taliban do awful things (to women for example) or Saddam tortured and killed people. Well our wars have not fixed those problems. The people we put in Saddam's place: they torture and kill people. In Afghanistan Hamid Karzai who we installed just passed a law legalizing rape if a man rapes his own wife (the law says it is illegal for a woman to refuse sex with her husband) So yes these governments do bad things as many throughout the world do, but war is not the way to fix the problem.

OK so some nut whack job crazy religious lunatics still want to bomb us because they are psychotic or brainwashed by religion or both, then what do we do? Well first of all if we have been friendly to the communities where these crazies live do you think they will get as much support from their communities as they do when we are invading and bombing them? Of course not. With less support they will be less successful. And for the criminal people who still do bad shit we use the international legal systems and law enforcement to go after them by cooperating with people and governments.

People will still be terrorists. Look around the US in the past couple weeks. How many Americans have walked into places and shot up other Americans? Maybe we should start bombing American cities too.

Obama also is missing an opportunity for fundamental change in the way we support our ally in war crimes Israel. Be allies, sure, but when Israel acts as a terrorist nation and invades a place like Gaza and kills thousands we need to say it is wrong. Israelis are rightly upset that rockets are fired into Israel from Gaza. Well the violent treatment has not stopped the rockets! Gaza is a prison, the people are suffering and frightened. Israel has the power. What if Israel gave Palestinians help instead of hurt, I bet there would be less rockets.

Of course all this has a deeper root problem and that is Military for profit! You had to know I would go there. But military for profit is even sicker than health care for profit. Again the top 1% are sucking off billions of dollars in profit (tax payer money) by making bombs, by having private mercenary armies. If war is your business then wouldn't you want war? Of course you would. And the sickest thing is that the people running our government (The Bush Family for instance) and making the decisions to go to war, are the same as the people profiting off the military industrial complex and have been for generations. We sell (or buy with taxpayer money and then give away) billions of dollars in weapons to countries like Pakistan, Israel, Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Colombia, etc. Why because it is profitable. We arm all sides in the Middle East.

Obama is hiring new Black Waters, increasing the military budget, expanding the war on terror. He now owns the war on terror. It is no longer Bush and Cheney's war. They started it and now Obama is continuing it. Damn him.

And he may win it, kill off Al Qaida somehow. But there is quote I love which I had painted on my van for while: "The problem with war is not with the losers, it is with the winners. For they think they have just proved that war is the answer."

so Obamas third missed opportunity for change:

Obama missed the chance to discredit war as a useful tool of foreign policy in combating terrorism, to pin the blame for these wars on the neo-cons who started them, and to show the world a better way to make the world safe and free. He also seems to have missed the chance to end the horrible inhumane unjust system of war for profit. A nonprofit military could still be strong, it could still employ lots of people with good salaries, but we would save SO MUCH MONEY by preventing the war monger 1% from extracting trillions of dollars in profit from the system and we would take away much of the motivation for those in charge (and who stand to profit) from starting wars and arming the world.

OK I now need a massage and some sleep.
No one around the give me a massage so I will just go to sleep.

peace
Danny

Obama made my day

2009-02-08T16:46:00.000-08:00

Well when I heard experts from Obama's Speech last Thursday about the stimulus package it made my day. Some say he sounded angry but to me it was a very refreshing change from the previous president and from the democrats in general. The Bush strategy was to tailor sound bites and give talking points and let the pundits spread the word. Very little direct communication between the President and the people.
So when Obama directly mentioned the Sunday talkers and the republican obstructionists and rebutted their arguments without any BS I was stoked. I look forward to a President and a democrat who will speak their mind and take on the right wing talking points. I think it will be to Obama's benefit if he talks directly to the people and finds ways to go around the right wing echo chamber that repeats falsehoods and talking points.
Anyway if you wanna check out the speech you can below, I look forward to our new president's future communications if they are like this one!

watch some of the speech

peace, Danny

the stimulus and the two party system

2009-01-30T12:51:00.000-08:00

Well politics is taking a fascinating turn as we head into this new administration. What will Obama do? What will congress do? How will the Republicans and Democrats work together or will they? How will Republicans act, with future elections on their mind. The two party system deserves a look at this time as well. If Obama and the democrats succeed in fixing our current problems, the Republicans will have a tougher time in the next election. If Obama fails they can make the case we need another Republican president. So how does this system work for the American people? Half of our government is hoping our government fails. Rush Limpballs even said it "I hope he fails!".

So do the Republicans best serve themselves by joining Dems? by obstructing them? or by sabotaging them on the sly?

Look at the stimulus package just passed by the House. Not one Republican voted for it. (this is AFTER Obama pressured Dems to remove key parts of the Bill at the request of the Republicnas) Their spokesperson said it included a bunch of the Democrats' "pet projects" and was a waste of government money. That is helpful: it clearly shows how the Republicans think about government. Roads, schools, healthcare, jobs, renewable energy, breaking our dependancy on foreign oil, these are a waste of money are the silly pet socialist projects of the tax and spend Democrats. This is after most of them voted to give an equal amount of money to wall Street without any oversight or requirements that the banks who get money do anything useful with it. We now know that $18 billion of that tax payer money was used for CEO bonuses. That is how out of wack the system is. These guys drive the world into recession, need the US government to bail them out, and they figure they deserve $18 billion in bonuses.

Their stance does bring one question to mind: what IS their idea of the role of government if not to provide these basic infrastructure projects and social programs? Of course we know the answer; provide a global police state in which the corporate elite can increase their share of the world's wealth. It should be crystal clear. Of course they are good at false advertising so they convince people that government spending is socialism and is BAD, that money given to rich people will trickle down to the poor, and that in a free country people should be able to earn as much as they can without sharing it (even though they could not make that much money without the commonly owned resources and infrastructure that the US allows them to take advantage of). How much money could any of them make if they lived alone on a desert island?
Look at Exxon, in 2008, the year of the recession and gas shock, they made $48 billion in profit! Meanwhile people are being foreclosed on and layed off at record rates and the republicans refuse to tax companies like Exxon. Talk about redustribution of wealth, they say Obama wants to 'spread' the wealth and that is so bad. But the Republicans want to CONCENTRATE the wealth. Which philosophy is more democratic? The republicans want to turn the US into a third world nation, it is as simple as that.

They cry socialism against Obama but look at how much money they are willing to give the military - a socialist military - and now to wallstreet - the socialist banking system.

The other cry of the republicans is that government is the problem. Well that is a self fullfilling proficy when they are in charge of it. But how ilogical is it to say America is this incredible place full of incredible people and we are in fact so good that we need to spread our form of government throughout the world, by force when necessary but that our government can't do anything right and our government is actually the problem. How is it the Republicans think they can run multinational corporations so well but not governments? Of course if you look at the banks right now and corporations like Enron, seems they can't run those well either.

My point in all this is why the hell are they allowed to have any say in our government? OK, they should have a say, let's give them about 20% of the seats in congress, that is generous since they represent the interests of 1% of the population. The libertarians can have 15%, greens 20%, and that leaves 45% for the democrats. Then when Dems want to get legislation passed they will have to pull in some greens or republicans so the dems can't do anything they want, and the minority parties will want to be on the side of helping the dems succeed in order to possibly increase their partie's representation. I think that would be a much better system than the two party 'if we can't win nobody will win' system we have now.

OK, rather than giving them thsese seats what if we simply did it like many European countries and gave out congressional seats according to the percentage of votes the party receives. Then voting for a 'third' party would not be 'throwing your vote away'.

Bottom line, the Republican system failed (supported by many democrats make no mistake), now let's try Obama's version and see if he can do better. I am guessing he can, as long as the Republicans don't sabatage him for their own political interests in our screwed up two party system that is just short of being a true democracy.

Jan 20, 2009 looking foward to good things

2009-01-20T06:44:00.000-08:00

Well today is the day, January 20, 2009, my bumper sticker calls it "The End of an Error". But not only is it the end of Bush/Cheney it is the beginning of Obama/Biden.

Many progressives and liberals are still a bit cynical about Obama and the conservative lean he has taken but I am looking at the glass half full, and this is what I see:

I am so looking forward to having a President that makes me smile when I see him and hear him. A President that is inspiring and intelligent. Obama recently met for an hour and half with the supreme court and reports say they were "blown away" by his intelligence.

I am looking foward to the United States being respected once again throughout the world. Not perfect of course but at least respected to the degree we once were.

I am looking forward to having scientists in charge of the EPA, and energy and environmental policies.

I am looking forward to having a president that believes action must be taken to curb global climate change.

I am looking forward to an Administration that put experts, not cronies, in charge of FEMA, the veterans administration, and department of agriculture.

I am looking forward to a President who is willing to talk with those who were formerly considered our enemies.

I am looking forward to descendants of slaves living in the White House which was built by slaves.

I am looking forward to a time when ideas like green jobs and green energy are part of the mainstream debate and hundreds of billions of dollars are invested in such things.

I am looking forward to having a President who can unite those who disagree to get things done rather than divide us to get his way. A president who is going to do his best to run all aspects of the country as well as he can.

I am looking forward to having a competent president!

I am looking forward to an end to government sponsored torture and other war crimes.

I am looking forward to improved health care and education systems.

I am looking forward to smarter trade policies.

I am looking forward to liking our President even when I disagree with him.

I am looking forward to the end of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. (We can HOPE)

I am looking forward to a President who I believe has a truly good heart.

I am looking forward to the 44th President of the United States: Barack Hussein Obama!

Waging Peace, The US congress, and Gaza

2009-01-09T08:23:00.000-08:00

Hi there,

Well every morning the news is worse, more people slaughtered in Gaza. War is horrible and the conflict there is complicated and has been a long standing one. There is plenty of blame to go around.

What finally spurred me to write this morning was what I heard come out of the US Senate. They passed a resolution with an overwhelming majority voicing support for Israel's right to defend themselves. In the same resolution they said they fully support the "peace" process.
This illustrates so well, as did the overwhelming support for the war in Afghanistan, that our elected government is so militaristic they are blind to reality. So far, it seems, Obama is in this camp too, I hope he surprises me. Dennis Kucinich, my favorite of the dems in the primary, was one of the few senators to speak out against the resolution.

We need to WAGE PEACE, not war, if peace is what we want.

If the goal is peace then the question is what is the best action to take to work towards peace. I suggest the action taken by Hamas, Israel, and condoned by the US Senate is exactly the wrong action and will only deepen the conflict.

Interestingly enough this conflict in Gaza has flared up between the birthdays of Jesus and Martin Luther King Jr. Today I am discussing with my discussion group here at school the subjects of peace, justice, and equality in preparation for next week's march in honor of Martin Luther King Jr.

Now sure, Israel has the right to "defend" themselves. I personally take issue with the degree of "defense" they are engaging in. If the boy next door throw rocks at your house you don't go and burn theirs down while their baby sister is trapped inside and then prevent the fire department from rescuing the screaming child.
Last I heard ten Israelis had been killed (four by Israeli friendly fire) and nearly 800 Palestinians had been killed 20% of which were children.

The stories are horrific of course, war is horrific. We are talking about children laying with their dead mothers for days while the Israeli troops prevent the Red Cross from entering the building to rescue the survivors in the bombed building (this according to the Red Cross). Regardless of what Hamas has done to provoke this how will those children grow up to feel about Israel?
But I do not want to argue whether or not Israel has the right to defend themselves in this way. My feelings should be obvious. But I would argue with the idea that this is the smart thing to do if Israel wants the bombs from the Palestinians (and support from countries like Iran) to stop.
It is insane logic and has been proved wrong by all the previous military action taken by Israel.

The fact is by bombing and killing people you just increase the hatred and fear felt by the people in that country. This fear usually radicalizes at least a large percentage of the population who in turn end up supporting more radical, militaristic governments. The Palestinians need to learn this. With every bomb they send they put fear in the hearts of Israelis and give increased support for their right wing leaders.

When Israel isolates places like Gaza, when they turn their country into a virtual prison, keeping the people in poverty, (what the Vatican likened to a concentration camp) they cause the Palestinians to become increasingly desperate as well. Episodes like this where Israel goes in and slaughters and maims thousands of people, destroys thousands of homes, schools, and mosques, this really must put fear in the hearts and minds of the Palestinians. I doubt any of us reading this blog can even begin to imagine what it would be like. This will not be easily forgotten by the people who survive and will certainly turn some to take actions we would call "terrorism". War is always "terrorism". What do you think Bush's "Shock and Awe" in Baghdad was all about? It was meant to "terrorize" the Iraqi's into submission.

War is not the answer!

And after this horrific overwhelming use of military forces it DISGUSTS me that the US Senate would take the time to pass a resolution in support of Israel. Why not spend the time to call on BOTH sides to stop the fighting! And our government, by doing this, is negligent in their duty to keep the American people safe. Our elected officials claim they want to protect us from terrorism. How do you think the Arab world feels about the US when they watch what is happening in Gaza and then they see our government falling all over themselves to voice their support for the slaughter. Regardless of what you believe, this is not a wise strategy in the push to end the hatred that drives some to use terrorism against us.

The cycle of violence will only stop when one side decides to stop it. The only way to stop it is to STOP being violent. If Hamas stops then Israel will have no way to legitimate it's military actions and if Israel stops then same can be said about Hamas.

Now there is one other factor and that is the fact Israel has so much control over Palestine that they can terrorize the Palestinians without using military force, as we have seen in their isolation of Gaza during the recent cease-fire. For this reason Israel has more responsibility in this picture. Israel, if it wants peace, must show it by WAGING PEACE on Palestine. Open the boarders, let Palestinian farmers go to their farms, through economic aide uplift the Palestinians so they are not in desperate poverty. Not Israel's responsibility you say?, well if they want peace it might be worth the investment. Or perhaps they should meet with Egypt, Iran, or other Arab nations and allow them to provide humanitarian and economic aide to Palestine.

Point is someone has to turn the other cheek, be the BIGGER person, and to truly wage peace.

Same is true of the American Government! We should cut our military budget by say 5% a year. This money could be invested in an effort to wage peace in countries we believe are a threat. Building schools instead of bombing them, helping farmers, providing water, building hospitals. Lifting people out of poverty would give them less reason to hate us, take away the leverage their extremist governments have, and reduce the ability of radical groups like Al Qaida to recruit new members.

It is simple, if Al Qaida knocks on two doors. Behind one they talk with a man who's family was killed by a US bomb while attending a wedding in Afghanistan and behind the other they find a man who was given a tractor and taught how to farm his land sustainably by the US government which one do you think will join Al Qaida?

As we said in the 80's. No Duh!

In the honor of Jesus and Martin Luther King Jr. we need to let our voices for peace be heard. Voting is not enough. Write letters or get out in the streets and shut down cities, whatever your style, don't be silent, if you care about peace, justice, and equality.

work for peace and pray for an end to the killing.

Obama's (dis)appointments / we must lead

2008-11-26T21:27:00.000-08:00

OK, so I will do my best not to be cynical.

First I am relieved beyond words we do not have another Republican Administration to live through right now. Unfortunately we do have a Democratic Administration to deal with.

Obama promised change and change he will bring. Already we hear he is letting top scientists develop policy to fight global climate change. That right there is HUGE considering the past 8 years has truly been a war on science. Obama has appointed the right man to fix FEMA - the same guy who made it great under Bill Clinton. He has a few progressives scattered here and there and I am thankful for that. He is definitely a change from the past 8 years.

Before I get into his team let me just say that it is OUR responsibility to let him know and our other representatives know what we think about the decisions he and they make. I am personally holding judgement until we see what policies he pursues. The other day Obama responded to criticism that he is hiring all insiders. Many progressives are asking where is the change? Obama said not to worry, that HE is the change. He said that he has chosen people with experience and mixed them with new thinking. So we shall see, so far I am trusting Obama's judgement but I think it will be super important for the American people to continue to push him, especially if we want to end the wars.

So briefly his team of (dis)appointments. I say that because he has chosen people who have been at the center of the bad policies of late, but perhaps they have told Obama they understand where they went wrong and they are willing to change, we shall see. I must say that I am not surprised by his choices. During the primaries I told people who loved Hilary but hated Obama that in fact their administrations would look VERY similar.

So Secretary of State - Hilary Clinton. For me a major bummer since her hawkishness on foreign policy was the original reason I supported Obama over her. Talking about "obliterating Iran" and all. But she is well known throughout the world , she must have asked for the job, and she deserves to have her choice as runner up. But what exactly is her foreign policy experience? Certainly there were better choices out there.

Keeping Sec of Defense Gates - well he wants no time table in Iraq, a major surge in Afghanistan, and wants a new arsenal of nuclear weapons. Boo. This guy should get the boot. And seems like he may have worked with the Republicans and Iranians to screw Carter over on the hostage deal. And so many on Obama's policy team are hawks and were champions of the Iraq war. Madaline Allbright of course said killing 500,000 Iraqi children with sanctions was a price worth paying to keep Saddam under control.

His economic team were champions of deregulation and wall street and have in fact helped cause financial crisis in Russia, Asia, and here at home. I guess if they broke it at least they are familiar with it. But to me these guys should go too.

And his intelligence crew were champions of warrentless wire tapping, extraordinary rendition, and torture.

Not to be negative but we do need to watch what kind of influence these guys will have on policy or if it is true that Obama is gonna draw on their experience but lead them in a new direction.

Most important to me is that we end the wars. I think with the crowd he is surrounding himself with we will need to push him as an anti-war movement to actually bring these wars to an end.

Fake New York Times - amazing website resource!

2008-11-13T09:57:00.000-08:00

hey there,

Well today the Yes Men (check out the documentary about them if you do not know these guys they are incredible pranksters) gave out over a million copies of a fake edition of the New York Times with all sorts of articles like "The Iraq War Ends" and others including articles about national health care, sane economy, etc. It is really well done and worth checking out on their website you can download a PDF version. The video news release is cool to.

But the thing I really wanted to point out in this blog is "The Fine Print" part of their website. It is an amazing resource listing dozens of organizations to check out that are working for change on which ever issue is important to you. Check it out below and make time to sit down and visit these sights and sign their petitions so they have some clout when meeting with politicians.

peace, Danny

ps, any New York friends get a copy of this? I would love one!

fake NY Times website

see video

The Fine Print

By Amal Maamlaji
Published: July 4th, 2009

This special edition of The New York Times comes from a future in which we are accomplishing what we know today to be possible.

The dozens of volunteer citizens who produced this paper spent the last eight years dreaming of a better world for themselves, their friends, and any descendants they might end up having. Today, that better world, though still very far away, is finally possible — but only if millions of us demand it, and finally force our government to do its job.

It certainly won’t be easy. Even now, corporate representatives are swarming over Washington to get their agendas passed. The energy giants are demanding “clean coal,” nuclear power and offshore drilling. Military contractors are pushing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. H.M.O.s and insurance companies are promoting bogus “reforms” so they can forestall universal health care. And they’re not about to take no for an answer.

But things are different this time. This time, we can hold accountable the politicians we put into office. And because everyone can now see that the “free market” has nothing to do with freedom, there is a huge opening to pass policies that can benefit all Americans, and that can make us truly free — free to pursue an education without debt, go on vacation every once in a while, keep healthy, and live without the crushing guilt of knowing what our tax dollars are doing abroad.

Following are just a few of the many, many groups working for change. Join them, support them, or start your own, and we can begin to make the news in this paper the news in every paper.

If you want to end the war in Iraq and prevent new wars: United for Peace and Justice (unitedforpeace.org), a coalition of that includes CODEPINK (codepink4peace.org), Iraq Veterans Against the War (ivaw.org), Peace Action (peace-action.org), War Resisters League (warresisters.org), and hundreds of others.

If you want to fight for health care: Healthcare-NOW (healthcare-now.org), Physicians for a National Health Care Program (pnhp.org), California Nurses Association (calnurse.org), Private Health Insurance Must Go Coalition (phimg.org), Single Payer New York

If you want to save the environment: Climate Crisis Coalition (climatecrisiscoalition.org), 350 (350.org), Greenpeace (greenpeace.org), Earth Policy Institute (earth-policy.org), Rainforest Action Network (ran.org), Earth First! (earthfirst.org), Earthjustice (earthjustice.org), Friends of the Earth (foe.org), Natural Resources Defense Council (nrdc.org)

If you want economic justice: United for a Fair Economy (faireconomy.org), Too Much (toomuchonline.org), Jobs with Justice (jwj.org)

If you want to protect our civil liberties, civil rights and human rights: Center for Constitutional Rights (ccrjustice.org), ACLU (aclu.org), National Lawyers Guild (nlg.org), National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (naacp.org), Global Exchange (globalexchange.org), PEN American Center (pen.org), Human Rights Watch (hrw.org), Defending Dissent Foundation (defendingdissent.org)

If you want to end torture: Witness Against Torture (witnesstorture.org), Amnesty International (amnestyusa.org), Act Against Torture (actagainsttorture.org), The Quaker Initiative to End Torture (quit-torture-now.org).

If you want to defend the rights of immigrants: New York Immigration Coalition (thenyic.org), National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (nnirr.org), Desis Rising Up and Moving (drumnation.org), New York United for Immigrant Rights (nyunitedforimmigrantrights.blogspot.com)

If you want to help eliminate worker exploitation: United Students Against Sweatshops (usas.org), Sweatshop Watch (sweatshopwatch.org), Wake Up Wal-Mart (wakeupwalmart.com)

If you want to end homelessness and promote affordable housing: National Coalition for the Homeless (nationalhomeless.org), National Low Income Housing Coalition (nlihc.org), National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty (nlchp.org), National Alliance to End Homelessness (endhomelessness.org), Coalition for the Homeless (coalitionforthehomeless.org), Picture the Homeless (picturethehomeless.org), Housing Works (housingworks.org), Metropolitan Council on Housing (metcouncil.net)

If you want to fight for a more democratic media: Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (fair.org), FreePress (freepress.net), Democracy Now! (democracynow.org), Reporters Without Borders (rsf.org), Committee to Protect Journalists (cpj.org)

If you want to create a more democratic media: MediaChannel (mediachannel.org), The Indypendent (indypendent.org), Common Dreams (commondreams.org), AlterNet (alternet.org), Cultures of Resistance (culturesofresistance.org), Indymedia (indymedia.org), Video Activist Network (videoactivism.org)

If you want to fight for women’s rights: National Organization For Women (now.org), A.C.L.U. Women’s Rights Project (aclu.org/womensrights), H.R.W. Women’s Rights (hrw.org/women), Feminist Majority (feminist.org).

If you want to defend LGBTQ rights: FIERCE (fiercenyc.org), Radical Homosexual Agenda (radicalhomosexualagenda.org), Sylvia Rivera Law Project (srlp.org), AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (actupny.org), Audre Lorde Project (alp.org)

my reaction to the election - not the time for cynicism

2008-11-09T13:00:00.000-08:00

Wow, the dust has settled and we have a new president-elect! The general feeling I have about the election is relief! Not only was it a long election but the choices between the hopeful message of Obama and the fearful message of McCain were in stark contrast and I for one am very relieved hope prevailed.

But the feelings go far beyond relief. Obama is much more than the lesser of two evils. He is a phenomenal person. Look at the way he ran his campaign to the end. He really focused on positive messages and his calm cool attitude and message of hope is so refreshing and admirable. Of course the cynics will say he did what he did just to get elected. But at least he chose to try and get elected with a positive message rather than the message of fear that McCain resorted to and that has defined the Bush administration. Obama is intelligent, thoughtful, a loving father and husband, calm under pressure, and I believe he has the best of intentions both from his heart and mind. And it is so incredibly wonderful to have a leader that has these characteristics! It has been awhile since we have.

And besides being enjoyable to listen to and besides the fact he has a capable intellect, he happens to be half black. And this fact actually was impressed upon me most significantly on election night and during the initial reaction to his win. I must admit I was a bit teary eyed during his acceptance speech. Much of was what he said and how he said it, much of it was the view of the crowd, and much of it was the thought of what this meant to our country and the world who was watching. We all know what he said, it was beautiful, (as I must say was John McCain's speech that night - we are lucky he did not speak so eloquently throughout the campaign). I was struck by the crowd. Especially in contrast to McCain's crowd which was as white as snow. The crowd gathered to watch Obama was young and old, white and black, and just looked so beautiful in their happiness and diversity. And to see the Obama and Biden families on stage together. What a sight. What a day for America!

And the third thought I had that night was that the world was watching! America for quite some time has been a dominant country in the world. The global opinion of us had slipped dramatically with the presidency of Bush and our actions post 9/11. To an all time low in fact. In one night much of that has changed. We once again set the bar high for democracy. No other western country has done what we have done and I doubt any third world democracy has done it - to elect a member of a small minority (12%), a minority who has suffered incredible oppression, to be the leader of that country in open democratic (relatively) elections. And it wasn't just that he is black. The world recognized what a significant change Obama represented in American leadership and they were rooting for him overwhelmingly. Obama is not just an American leader, he is a world leader.

And then during the initial reaction to the election the significance was clarified for me even further. My cell phone was blowing up with text messages, the country, the world was celebrating. You could hear mother Earth make a huge sigh of relief. I received a call right away from a friend in Indonesia, and emails from South Africa to London. Some of the poignant reactions came from African American friends. It is easy as a white person to think we understand, but we do not, we can't. This was illustrated to me by friends. One talked about his dad who grew up in the south in the 50's. He said that this day was as likely to him as seeing aliens land on our planet. And a coworker of mine, one of my mentors really, someone I think of as being successful and confident told me that for the first time in his life did he truly believe he could be anything he wants to be. Think about that. That is such an incredible change right there. Imagine all the kids in this country and in the world who now have a whole different set of possibilities ahead of them. Imagine all the adults that do now too.

It makes me proud to be an American.

Now for the cynics! Even I have had a hard time shedding my cynicism towards our government. During the Bush years I was quite a cynic as we watched the administration get away with crimes against the constitution and humanity. And hearing Obama talk about which wars he would fight or watching him choose Wall Street and Washington insiders to run his transition team definitely ignited a bit of that cynic. But I am officially giving that up right now. and I will explain why I think we all should.

I agree with the positions of Ralph Nader on issues, more so than Obama in fact, but hearing Nader's cynicism about Obama after his election made me quite disgusted. Let's get real. We will not likely ever agree with every policy stance by any national political figure. That is part of the beauty of living in a free country, we can disagree and say it out loud. But I lost what little respect I had left for Nader when he could not put his differences with Obama aside for a minute, to feel some pride for the Nation and honor Obama for the man that he is.

I know the root of any cynicism is that Obama is a politician and the idea that Obama may not make everyone happy with what he does once he is in charge. The cynics ask will he really bring about change? Or will he smash our hopes with another corporate aligned administration? Many see a third Clinton administration as the worst case scenario and for others that in itself would be a welcome change from the past 8 years. We all have different ideas of what change we would like to see. But the undeniable fact is Obama has already brought change, he has already inspired hope, and I believe much of this will be here to stay and there will be many more positive changes to come.

Sure he has two unwinnable wars to deal with and the worst economy in generations. He won't be able to do everything he wants or that we want. But he is gonna dramatically change the course of this country and the world. A few examples:

First off, I am OK with the fact that Obama is surrounding himself by Washington and Corporate power houses. We know this is how Washington works and this is smart for a few reasons. First without insider knowledge of the players and the game, making change would be difficult. Plus the fact is we may want to change the way the system works but we are in a mess right now and we do want to avoid screwing things up with good meaning but ill informed change. And thirdly and perhaps most importantly Obama needs to be inclusive as to not alienate any powerful groups. He needs to bring all the players down the same road for true success. If he can keep the powerful players content while helping the players who have been previously left out he will be truly successful.

Two great examples of this is his plan to change our nation's policies towards the environment and labor. While he has much of the corporatist elite on his side, he also has talked extensively to labor and environmental leaders. He has an aggressive agenda to role back as many as 200 presidential directives of president Bush. He has teams of lawyers identifying the most controversial directives Bush made and compiling a list to reverse. These are things like Bush's decision to deny California the right to regulate it's own carbon dioxide emissions. With a stroke of a pen this will be a real game changer in the fight against global warming.
Bush has ignored his administration's own scientists in the FDA, EPA, NASA, and elsewhere and relaxed regulation on pollution, increased restrictions on stem cell research and taken away funding for it, and has prohibited family planning groups in other countries who receive US aid from counseling women on abortion, even when it is legal. These are the kinds of things Obama will change. He is talking with labor leaders, environmental leaders, scientists, as well as congressional leaders from both sides of the isle before taking action.

In fact as Bush leaves office he is planning on a wide range of his most controversial deregulatory actions in the coming months including wiping out rules on pollution, protecting endangered species, labor laws, and others. The Obama team is watching these moves and has vowed to overturn whichever last minute moves they can. Unfortunately it is easier to erase laws than to reinstate them.

And luckily there are people who Obama will certainly listen too like Gore who are pushing for quick and decisive action to fight global warming and making the argument that this is the action needed to help the economy and our national security.

Another example is the military. He seems to be pretty pro-military action but at the same time he has met at length with groups like Iraq Vets against the war and is clearly a level headed, diplomatically inclined leader.

So I truly believe that while he will be keeping the Empire running, he will be doing it with a good conscience, and what a change that will be. He will make green energy a focus, he will appoint competent experts to run departments like FEMA and the EPA rather than cronies and corporate hacks, he will end the war against the working class, he will improve our health care system, he will repair alliances with countries around the world, and he will close Guantanomo, return the rule of law to the justice department, and undo many of the bad policies of the Bush Administration.

In short he will make change a reality and that gives me Hope.

PS We need to join with groups that are working to lobby Obama and the congress to bring about the change we want to see. Don't just sit back and watch and then complain that he didn't do what you wanted. Get out in the street, organize your community, write letters, join Internet groups, and ask for what you want from your federal employees.

Californians' most important vote: NO on "h8"

2008-10-28T08:28:00.000-07:00

Hi everyone,
Well of course the most imporant issue to the world right now is that Obama is elected President and McCain/Palin are denied their chance to bring about Armagedon.

Since California is probably in the bag for Obama I titled this blog, Californians' most important vote. For this is a very pressing issue and it is disturbing that proposition 8 has a chance to pass. It is vital everyone gets out to vote No and to spread the word to their friends and colleagues and even their neighbors with whom they may disagree. This is a civil rights issue and one worth standing up for.

The ridiculous proposition would amend the California State Constitution to prevent same sex marriage. Now regardless of how you feel about marrying someone of your own sex, amending the constitution to limit the rights of a portion of our society is plain WRONG! Imagine if a majority decided to vote that Blacks and Whites should not marry. This is Tyranny of the majority and should not be allowed.

Of course the arguments for prop 8 are rooted in hatred and bigotry but they use all sorts of lies and distortions to convince the electorate to vote for this awful law.

This is supposed to be the land of the free, well let people marry who they want. Two consenting adults should be able to marry each other regardless of race, religion, or sex. Period.

Now this morning I heard a radio ad for prop 8 that said this issue is all about school kids and that kids will be taught about gay marriage if this passes. Well as a teacher who has worked in a number of schools I can say this amendment will have little or no effect on that. Kids will be taught about same sex couples regardless. For our job as educators is to teach children to respect diversity. This diversity certainly pertains to different types of families for at all the schools I have worked we have had kids with two moms or two dads and there is no teacher I know who wants those children to feel like their family is wrong or weird. Of course I live in the Bay Area where people are ahead of the curve on this basic human right issue. But nonetheless teachers need to create safe learning environments for their students and this means teaching students to respect each other in all their wonderful differences.

In school we talk about kids having two moms or two dads, we do not get into the details of whether or not the parents are legally married. We do not discuss what would happen if one of them died and the other could not have legal custody of their child or if one was sick whether or not they could be with them in the hospital and make legal decisions regarding medical treatment. These are rights that laws like Prop 8 could take away, which is one of the reasons to vote it down.

Even if you are against all this, do really want to start a precedent of allowing the majority of voters to amend the constitution to limit the rights of minorities in this country? Amendments to the constitution have a history of granting people rights, not taking them away.

For this reason alone proposition 8 must fail.

This is a human and civil rights issue and everyone needs to get out and vote!

Thanks,

Danny

the most important action you may ever take

2008-10-22T20:40:00.001-07:00

" Those who say it can't be done need to stop interrupting those already doing it!"

Please stick with me through this convoluted essay. There are lots of points I will try to make briefly. Basically I am arguing that every one of us MUST take action (beyond voting) because we have an opportunity to spark a change in world history as monumental as the industrial revolution, and the cost of inaction is likely to be very dire indeed. We must use this grass roots enthusiasm for the November election and the widespread concern over the economy and national security to put pressure on our elected officials to take immediate and drastic action toward a future of green, clean, domestic energy. This will reduce our dependence on and financial support of the middle east, it will put our economy back on track driving innovation and creating jobs, and it will put us back as leaders in the world in addressing the most pressing global issue of our time; global climate change. To anyone who says we cannot afford to this we must say "we cannot afford not to".

(This blog was written and then I saw today's headline which said the economy may prevent either candidate from addressing global warming. This is the fallacy we need to expose! We just threw $700 billion at to save wall street. What about saving the world? What if a country threatened to devastate an American city (Like New Orleans) we might launch a $3 trillion war (like Iraq) to prevent it. Well if we don't act we will have moreKatrinas , we will see war over water and food resources throughout the world, do you think terrorism in the world will be more of a threat in the world if this happens, of course. And we must remember that efficiency can go a long way towards fixing the problem with relatively little investment and will create jobs which will grow the economy. The more domestic energy production we have the more money we will keep circulating in our economy. Also green energy lends itself much more towards the creation of small companies than does say oil and of course small companies help our economy much more than do large international corporations. But I digress)

A few months ago I wrote a journal entry about what I see as the coming paradigm shift in humanity and how I am dedicated to doing my part in bringing it about. I will turn this into a blog in thenearish future but it basically was about a future of social and environmental justice, a future where economics, environmental stewardship, human rights, consumerism, energy, politics, international trade, national security, and other issues are thought of systemically and through a moral lens of cooperation, empathy, efficiency, and the right of all living things to exist unharmed by the actions of others.

Now I had envisioned this taking an unknown amount of time and my main niche for helping to cause this shift is through education of our younger generations to understand their sense of place in the world and how they can live as a contributing member to the world rather than a destructive force.

But since I wrote that the world has changed. There is a window of opportunity that has presented itself since then and many experts argue it could be the last chance we have. Two factors have opened this window and provided lubrication for us to slip through it. One is the financial crisis and failure of the "free market" and two is the election of a new president and new congress.

OF course we do not know at this point who the next president will be and if there will be a shift in the congress (to say a Democratic,fillabuster proof majority). Regardless of who wins we must attempt to do what I lay out below. I think Obama is much more likely than his opponent to actually take the steps needed and he will only have the power to do so if there is a majority in congress who will agree with him or push him in the right direction. Of course if Obama is elected there is no guarantee he will be thetransformative president we need. That is where we come in. If elected Obama and congress will have industry lobbyists and Washington nay sayers filling their ears with garbage. Trasformative presidents of the past acted because the groundswell of citizens pushing for change was too much to ignore. This is what we need again. This is the defining moment of our time, how we shapeObama's presidency in the first few months could change the course of the world and honestly if we fail the world's leading experts now agree the situation will be dire.

So the economic collapse is a double edged sword. On the bright side it has gotten usually apathetic Americans to wake up and pay attention to the issues and to want a solution. It has also exposed the deregulated free market as fundamentally flawed and forced even Republicans to take steps to "socialize" or "federalize" the banking industry. In other words they can no longer argue that there is no role for government to play in all this.

On the down side the crisis has drained even further our coffers. With 700 billion dollars thrown at the problem we are even further in debt and even less likely to be able to muster up large amounts of money to pay for programs that the people want and need. Cities, States, and Federal agencies are all slashing budgets at a time we need investment in our future.

Luckily doing the right thing is also good for business and can SAVE us money. For EFFICIENCY is gonna be one of the most important first steps. Efficiency alone can help us get off fossil fuels, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, create jobs, drive innovation, and will save us money!! Just a small example. If we were to introduce basic energy efficiency to this country's public school system we could save $6 billion! That is enough to hire 30,000 new teachers. McCain is right, we do not necessarily need to throw more money at the problem to solve it. Imagine the savings to be had in the Military budget!!! Let's bring our troops home and employ them to make our nation's buildings energy efficient!

Now back to global climate change. There is a magic number that scientists said is the point at which we cannot avoid climate change that will greatly effect our world and its ability to provide food, water, and stable living conditions for those of us who live here. That number is 350 and it represents parts per million of CO2 in the atmosphere. (Go to 350.org to learn more and take action!) We are already PAST that number which means we need to take immediate and dramatic action to freeze and reverse the current trend. In 2009 the world community will gather to try and agree on a global plan to address this issue. (Leading experts warn this is most likely the world's last chance to address this problem effectively. We need, as "the leaders of the free world", in this country, to take a lead on the issue and we need our President to go to this meeting in '09 and be able to say, "here are the steps WE ARE TAKING, and we hope the rest of the world will join us". (again for the naysayers who say "what about China, India, etc. Well China right now is actually doing more than we are, they are not necessarily unwilling, in fact they are less entrenched in the old way of doing things than we are. And when developing nations realize it is actually cheaper and more sustainable to be green, clean, and efficient do think they will hesitate?

To elaborate on the cheaper part of it. In a time of abundance it is easy to be wasteful. Americans throw out 25 % of the food we buy. (During the depression do you think this was the case?) The standard light bulb wastes 95% of its energy producing heat. Our cars get half the miles per gallon than the cars in Europe. If we increased the fuel efficiency of cars we would not have to "drill baby drill" or even import oil from the middle east and it would cost less for Americans to get to work/school/etc. So as oil prices rise so do food prices and as the economy turns down people need to save money. Efficiency is the easiest first step and it happens to also be the best way to be an "environmentalist".

So back to politics. Our government is by the people for the people. So we the people need to be engaged. We need to be a voice that can be heard over the chatter of coal industry lobbyists. We need to say no to new coal and we need to say it loud. There is no such thing as "Clean Coal" - this is just a theory and the fact Obama talks about it shows us what we are up against. But I strongly believe that Obama has the intellect, foresight, and heart to grasp the problem and chose the right solutions. But we must let him and our representatives in congress know that this is important to us.

The take home message must be that we need to address global climate change and in doing so we will solve our economic and national security problems and without doing so any attempts to fix the latter two problems will fail! It needs to be done through efficiency and clean, renewable energies like solar and wind, we need to stop using coal and nuclear power, reduce our use of oil and natural gas, and end the wars which are draining our resources and destroying lives and the environment.

This sounds like a lot but it must be done, in fact it is already being done. For example through the efforts of nonprofits and foundations who came together to revolutionize how these two sectors work together, taking a systemic, cooperative approach, the RE-AMP initiative has made huge progress in the countries most unlikely region. RE-AMP is a seven-state network of nonprofits and foundations, striving for Midwest leadership in 21st century clean energy by reducing electricity sector global warming pollutants 80 percent by 2030. This group has been so successful that the governors from each of the states involved have signed on to the plan. And RE-AMP has done this with investment in the millions (pennies for the federal government).

And if you think industry won't like it then get them to talk with Ray Anderson. A dozen years ago he made the audacious goal of turning his $1 billion dollar carpet manufacturing company Interface, INC. , into one with a ZERO environmental footprint! He is now halfway to his goal and each and every step the company has boosted profits by more than he could have imagined. Green is good for business!

So what can each of us do? There are a few things we all can do, MUST do!

(before you think you do not have time, we all can admit that we have some time we could devote to saving the world. Turn off the TV, put down your magazine, and get to work!

1) The first small step is VOTE! And make sure EVERYONE you know is voting.

2) Join 1sky This is a very well organized group pushing politicians to fight global climate change through green jobs and green energy. At the least join them, better yet, get everyone you know to join, and even better still become a precinct captain to make sure we succeed in this mission.

4) Go to the Presidential Climate Action Project, learn about the Plan and sign your support.

5) Go to 350.org and invite Obama/McCain to the 2009 global summit on global climate change.

6) Call and write letters to your congressional representatives as well as key members of congress and federal government and tell them you think this is of utmost importance. To find out who to contact and how to do it go to USA.gov.

7) write letters to the editors of every newspaper and magazine you can think of!

8) spread the word to everyone you know!

thanks for taking the time to read this and even more thanks for passing it on and doing your part to be an engaged citizen of this country and world.

Peace and God Bless the World,
Danny