Tell Obama to act on his words!!!

-->

Ok folks, Obama gave a great speech at his inauguration.  No surprise there, we all know he can give good speeches.  His speech hinted at a lot of good progressive action and ideas.  (he was the first to use the word gay in an inaugural address and I can’t believe any before him talked about climate change, but I am not sure)

But he, by nature of his office, is more of a follower than a leader.  For the past four years we have seen him follow Wall street’s advice, follow the advice of members deep in the military industrial complex,  follow advice from Monsanto, follow advice from the fossil fuel industry.  So we need to make sure we push him to follow what the American people want, and to FOLLOW THROUGH on the things he said in this wonderful speech.

So please take every chance you get to tell him what you want him to do (his phone number is: (202-456-1111 and you can email him here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/submit-questions-and-comments)

Some examples of where his words offer HOPE that he may CHANGE (if pushed to do so) what he has done or failed to do during his first term in office. 

We never know when we will have a more willing ally in the White House (and the jury is still out as to how willing he is) so the time is now.

Obama’s words:     “We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations.” 

 My reply: 

So far his administration has done very little, they were blamed for preventing a global climate change deal from happening at COP 18, he is on the brink of allowing the XL pipeline which would be ‘game over’ for the climate according to the leading scientists, he allowed more fossil fuel extraction than any president in history, I could go on.

What he needs to do, well many, many things, really, but we need radical action, not little band-aides.  One of the best ideas – a carbon tax and dividend so each person gets a check back to make up for the rise in cost of carbon based energy as we phase out of it. 

Obama’s words:  “We, the people, still believe that enduring security and lasting peace do not require perpetual war.”

My reply: on the same day he was giving this speech a US drone strike killed people in Yemen.  A war is still a war even when our own troops aren’t being killed.  Obama has GREATLY expanded drone strikes and even assassinations of US citizens abroad.  Yes, as much as I like Obama, he too is a war criminal, and this is probably why he did not let the Bush administration be brought up on any such charges.

Obama’s words: “We will show the courage to try and resolve our differences with other nations peacefully, not because we are naïve about the dangers we face, but because engagement can more durably lift suspicion and fear.”

My reply:  again, drone strikes are increasing suspicion and fear!  Making us less safe and terrorizing the people of foreign lands.  Obama must put an end to these.

Obama’s words: “to hear a King proclaim that our individual freedom is inextricably bound to the freedom of every soul on earth.”

My reply: what about all the people held without trial in Guantanamo?  Bagram?  People we admit are innocent!  What about whistle blowers like Bradley Manning – tortured for 9 months while waiting for a trial.  What about Obama’s failure to get tough with Israel over their treatment of the Palestinians, even now as they plan to build even more settlements on Palestinian land that will make a two state solution impossible. 

Obama’s words: “our journey is not complete until no citizen is forced to wait for hours to exercise the right to vote”

My reply:  The better fix this one, as preventing poor people from voting is one of the oldest tricks in the book. 

Obama’s words:  “our journey is not complete until we find a better way to welcome the striving, hopeful immigrants who still see America as a land of opportunity.”

My reply:  a better way to welcome them than deporting them?  Obama deported more immigrants than any other president.  He also spent more money on law enforcement for immigration than all other law enforcement combined.  He also signed numerous free trade agreements, which harm local economies in favor of multinational corporations, driving more and more people into poverty and desperation, leading to increased waves of immigration to this country. 

It was a great speech.  Time to put his money where his mouth is…and for us to do the same.

Peace.

the fiscal slope, false compromises, and my compromise

Well how can I not comment on the current fiscal debate?

First, whoever wanted to scare people into taking action or accepting that action did a good job coining the phrase 'fiscal cliff'.

Of course it is not a cliff.  If anything it is a slope, for it will take a year to get to the bottom of it.  If we head down the slope on Jan 1, and congress then takes action to solve the problems, we will not be so effected.  In fact, waiting for the slope, is a good strategy for Democrats, for then the Bush tax cuts will have expired and I doubt Republicans will not vote on record against renewing those tax breaks for the bottom 98%

And any compromise being talked about is such a false compromise!  The conventional wisdom is a compromise would be the Republicans giving in on renewing tax breaks for the top 2% and the Democrats would allow entitlement reform.  What??!

First off, the Republicans gave these tax breaks.  Tax breaks reduce revenue.  We have a problem with our deficit.  Tax breaks have a DIRECT effect on a deficit.  Same in California.  Republican administrations - Pete Wilson, Arnold S. - cut taxes, ballooning our state's deficit.  Then they cry that the deficit is a problem with spending and want to cut social programs they were against in the first place - medicare, social security, in California everything gets cut - education!  And the Republicans in California are the same as they are on the national level - they refuse to accept any tax increases (which is really just going back to how the taxes were before they gave their tax breaks that we cannot afford).

Now certainly the government can reduce its spending.  The BEST place to do that - the military and prison systems!!  We spend almost as much on our military as the rest of the world COMBINED!  And if jobs is what we are concerned about - the military is the LEAST EFFICIENT place to spend money for job creation, by far!  And how seriously do we hear this being debated or covered by the mainstream media?  Not at all is more like it.  We will not be the first nation to fall due its spending on Empire.

And this country has more people in jail than any country on Earth.  California, I believe, has more people in jail than all of Europe combined.  We need to spend money on education, not incarceration.  Legalize marijuana, that is an insane thing to be jailing people for and to be spending our tax money on!

Now, social security has NOTHING to do with the debt.  So how is giving in on this, compared to tax cuts for billionaires even comparable???  Social security pays for itself (actually we pay for it). It could be made solvent by making small adjustments like taking away the salary cap at which we stop paying into it.

Now jobs - the Republicans say increasing taxes on the wealthiest Americans (the wealthiest people on this planet) will harm job creation.  So the best estimation of this is that it will cost 200,000 jobs.  This is compared to the 12 million that are expected to be created in the next 4 years.  And I have heard noone compare those 200,000 jobs to the jobs lost if we were to make cuts rather than increase taxes for that money.  If you give less for social security, that is money that is mostly spent - put back out into the economy, creating jobs.  Spending creates demand, demand creates jobs. Jobs are not created by wealthy people who want to hire people because they got a tax break.  Making health care more difficult or expensive - this will harm the economy, reducing demand.  Any cuts you make will cost jobs.  The MOST LOGICAL place to get money is from the people who have more money than humans have ever experienced.  The top 1% owns something like 80% of the countries wealth! 

So MY compromise would be, rather than reinstating the Clinton era taxes for the top 2%, lets do it for the top 1%.  Or maybe for people making over one million dollars a year.  Because you can argue that there are families making $300,000 a year who have it all tied up in their fancy homes, cars, private school tuition, and apple products. Some of these families might actually have a difficult time paying extra taxes.  And of course we need to make sure actual small businesses are not harmed by this tax increase.  Most are not, this is a Republican talking point that has been debunked, but there are a few that fall into this tax bracket who would need to be protected.

That is my compromise.  Don't touch social security (except for making it solvent).  Expand medicare, if anything.  Bringing down medical costs are still something that needs to happen.  Invest in green tech, take away tax loopholes and subsidies for industries that don't need them like fossil fuels, greatly reduce our military spending. 

Here is the type of thing that is happening.  Some wealthy business guy in Florida said he would have to fire people if Obama got re-elected because his taxes would go up.  This same guy built the countries largest house - I think it was 96,000 square feet!  These are the types of people the Republicans in Washington are fighting for. 

So if you agree with me, get in touch with your representatives and tell them so!! 

the election is over, time for us to get to work!

So the election is over, now it is time for people (us not 'other' people) to get to work!  Politicians need to know they have support for the decisions they make.  Any decision is going to make some people upset.  To avoid getting people mad at them, it is easier not to take action.  Mass movements are successful because they give politicians the support (or push) to make the decisions that are going to make some upset. 

Many folks were upset that Obama did not do what they wished he would do during his first four years.  Each of those folks need to ask themselves, what did they do to try and get him to do what they wanted him to do?  Wishing is not enough.

We know the corporate class has many people pushing everyday for what they want.  There are more lobbyists in Washington than politicians and billions of dollars are spent influencing their decisions.  Just look at the fossil fuel industry, their lobbyists alone outnumber congress something like 4 to 1.  Not only is our government not taking dramatic action that is necessary to reduce our fossil fuel consumption, they continue to give tax payer subsidies to this industry even though they are the most profitable industry in the history of the world and our government is arguing over how to reduce federal spending.  It is logical only if you consider, who's voice is being heard the loudest in Washington?  (and who's money is backing the politicians)

Throughout American history, mass movements have been loud enough to make a difference.  The civil rights movement is perhaps the best example. 

While Obama was in the Oval Office, the Tea Party was the loudest movement, and they had influence, at least they gave politicians an excuse to do what the corporate powers were pushing for behind closed doors.

Occupy Wall Street was also very successful in changing the national dialogue.  The mainstream media went form talking about the deficit ceiling to the financial inequality in this country framed around the top 1% vs the bottom 99%. 

The anti-war movement and many other movements during the Bush administration unfortunately became 'anti'Bush' movements.  So once Obama was elected they dropped off.  We ended up with the Tea Party 'anti-Obama' movement.

It is much easier for a movement to be 'anti' something than 'pro' something.  In our busy lives, we often do not find the motivation to take the steps to participate in a movement until we are so upset by something that we decide to take part in protesting against it.  These 'anti' movements are not very sustainable. 

We need some 'pro' movements to really get strong.  Movements that will outlast one administration.  Movements that will paint such a seductively postive picture of the future that they will be irresistable.

But we cannot wait for other people to make these movements to happen.  We all need to be involved.  I know many of us are so busy it seems like we don't have time to take anything else on.  But even a little participation by many people can have a huge impact.  You don't have to sleep in camps like the occupy movement, you don't have to risk your life like the freedom riders of the 60's.  So what can you do? 

Well first off, if you have an opinion about decisions being made in Washington, or Sacramento, or by your local School Board, then tell the people who are representing you and making those decisions what you think they should do.  That is the LEAST everyone should do.  Write a letter, an email, make a phone call. 

  The media has a huge influence on public opinion and the decisions politicians make.  Writing a letter to the editor is a way to get your opinion into the media.  Next time you have a strong opinion on a subject being debated, try writing a letter.  Make your argument and have an influence on the debate.

Protests and rallies in the street get media attention.  Media attention brings your view into the dialogue.  You may not be one to organize protests, but next time there is a rally on a topic you feel strongly about, take time to go join in the action.  Public rallies are the heart of democracy.  Just think, people in Egypt and other countries are risking death to protest.   Obama and other policy makers cannot read your mind.  And they are not likely to read your blog.  You gotta do a little work to get your voice heard.  Political rallies are great ways for many individuals to have their voices heard.

Most importantly, we all need to make these things part of our regular life routines.  The stakes are too high to sit back and hope politicians are going to do the 'right' thing.  Our world is at a point where we are making potentially paradigm shifting decisions (and if we aren't then we should be).  At the same time a small group of extremely wealthy people are gaining more and more control over our political system.  The only way to have things go 'our way', is to get out and do our best to make them go our way.  And we cannot give up when we don't get our way. 

Millions protested against the Iraq war, but it happened anyway.  But since then, those who protested were proved right.  So next time there is a such a war on the table, maybe the protests will have an effect.  Maybe they won't.  But there is a guaranteed way to not have an effect, and that is to remain silent on an issue. 

So write a letter, join a rally, sign a petition, call your congressman or woman, and start doing so on a regular basis.  Time for us to take control of our future and have our voices heard.

another 'Stand your ground" murder in Florida

This just makes me sick, sick enough that I have to speak to it.
 A 17 year old African-American boy, Jordan Russell Davis, was murdered in cold blood by a white man, Michael David Dunn, in Florida.  The murderer is claiming self defense.
 According to Democracy Now!, Davis was sitting in a car with friends listening to loud music.  Dunn pulled up in a car next to them and asked them to turn their music down.  An argument ensued and then Dunn opened fire, shooting 8 or 9 times into the car, killing Davis.  Dunn says he thought he saw a gun in the boys' car.  No gun was found. 
 If this is not considered murder the what is?  What is he doing driving around with a loaded  gun and starting arguments with kids over their music volume if not looking for someone to shoot.  Insanity.

letter to editor: regarding prop 30 and 38

Vote Yes on 30 and 38, for our children and for our future,

      I am so excited to vote, not once, but twice for investing in our future and funding education.  Voting yes on Prop 30 and 38 is the perfect way for Californians to send a message to the politicians about what our priorities are.  There is nothing more important to our future than a strong public education system. 

      As a parent and a Site Council member for our local public elementary, I can tell you first hand that, after years of devastating budget cuts, our schools are in crisis.   

      California now ranks 40^th in per pupil spending and our schools’ performance ranks even worse.  Class sizes increase every year as teachers are laid off.  The school year is shorter.  Tuition at colleges is becoming prohibitive for many.  PE, art, music, high school counselors, and other programs are long gone.  My son’s school cannot even afford to buy paper for its students! 

     If neither prop 30 or 38 passes, we will have an extra $6 billion cut from the schools.  Having been closely involved in recent cuts, I can tell you, there is no room for further cuts.

  Voting yes on 30 and 38 is the best way, we as Californians, can stand together to reverse this trend and begin reinvesting in our children and in all of our futures. 

California's Propositions Danny's endorsements

Well I am excited to vote on some important propositions!  Now I am sure there are many reasons why these props are not perfect (the good ones) but I am excited to be able to vote for things like the end of the death penalty and the three strikes law!  Excited to vote for more money for schools! Excited to vote to label GMO food!  Excited to vote to protect the labor union's ability to counter balance corporate spending in politics!

So here are my endorsements with little or no explanation as I do not have much time:

Prop 30:  YES!!!!  Our school's have had their budgets cut to the BONE!  We need the money.  Voting yes sends the message we are willing to invest in the right things!

Prop 31:  No.  When in doubt vote no on props!  This does not seem like the fix we need. 

Prop 32: NO!!!!!!  This is an attack on political influence of unions by the corporate ruling class.  VERY bad idea!

Prop 33: No!  I have heard great arguments against this, a bad one.

Prop 34: YES!!!!  End the death penalty - makes sense morally and financially.  If you think we should have the death penalty look at the short list of countries that have it and ask yourself if they are known as models of human rights: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0777460.html

Prop 35: NO.  advocates say this law will do more harm than good.

Prop 36: YES!  We imprison more people for non-violent offenses than any country in the world.  The corporate prison complex is breaking our bank and ruining people's lives.

Prop 37: YES! of course!  We have the right to know what we are eating!  GMO's may pose a threat to health and nature and if nothing else they are a tool for corporations like Monsanto to control our food supply.  We should be able to chose if we support these products.  Once again, the US is way behind most of the world on this issue. 

Prop 38: YES!  Regardless of the details, our schools need money and our politicians need to know that we think so.

Vote for the environment - no more important issue!

OK, the environment is an issue I am particularly interested in.  But I would argue that it is also the most important issue.  Protecting the environmental means protecting human health.  Protecting the environment means protecting our food supply.  Protecting the environment means protecting our ability to live on this planet!

With climate change upon us, this has never been more true.  Our burning of fossil fuels is changing the climate around the world.  We are seeing increased floods, droughts, stronger storms, sea level rise threatens entire nations.

 This is an economic issue as well.  The super storm to just hit the east coast - Sandy, is projected by some analysts to cause $20 billion in property damage and $30 billion in lost business.  The drought stricken farmers in the US are crushed.  And climate change hits hardest in places where people were already on the brink - poor places like Africa.

This is an issue of national security as well.  Wars are fought over resources.  In a more chaotic climate, resources will be more scarce.  There will be billions of climate change refugees around the world.

If you look at the environmental voting record of the two parties in congress that the League of Conservation voters compiles every year the difference is night and day.  ( If you have never checked it out - download it and do so, it is an impressive record of the decisions being made on (or against) our behalf.     the most recent scorecard)  Just looking at the party leadership averages is a good pace to start - in the Senate the Democratic leadership has an average 97% voting record in favor of the environment while the Republican leadership has a 15% voting record.  In the House the Democratic leadership has a 94% record vs a 9% record for the Republican leadership.

Romney's pick for VP, by the way, had a 3% voting record, meaning this past year in congress he voted against laws that would protect the environment 97% of the time.

I think this issue is also a good window into the main difference between the two parties.  The Republicans are against the government trying to protect people or the environment and are in support of corporations being able to make profits without any oversight or laws that will make sure they don't harm the lives of others.  The Democrats believe the government has a roll in a capitalistic society to protect the welfare of people and environment by regulating corporations in their one goal of making as much money possible.

Corporations have no morals. They have one mission - make money.  It is essential that we have a government that is willing to design rules they must play by that will allow them to make money but prevent them from doing so by destroying the livability of our planet! 

For this reason alone, I will always throw my support behind the Democrats on the ballot over the Republicans.  And I will go so far as to say that with the Republicans being the only major political party on EARTH to deny the threat of climate change, that they are the one political group on Earth that is currently posing the largest threat to the planet.  As far as I am concerned, hearing Mitt Romney say "I love coal" in the debate was equivalent to him saying "I love killing people and the planet."  And the XL pipeline that is designed to bring tar sand oil to market.  If we burn that oil (the dirtiest on the planet) experts say it is game over - we will have so much CO2 in the air that the Earth may actually become unlivable for most humans.  That sounds extreme, hard to believe, but at least worth thinking about?  Not for Romney who is gonna get that pipeline flowing as soon as he can if he wins. 

Obama is not the best leader we could have on this issue - but he and his party are the most likely allies we will find on this issue in the current national political landscape.  By far!