Yup, I said it and I don't regret it

Perhaps a better title for this article would be the ghost of posts past.  January of 2016 will mark the seventh anniversary of this blog. I don't know whether to cheer, cry, or sigh. I have already provided labels to make it easy for you to find the posts that I think are most representative of my views on a range of topics, but I cannot resist adding some excerpts from posts that are unlabeled and in danger of being buried and forgotten. Chalk it up to a seven year itch or an unwarranted ego as you will.

From Obama v. The Dixiecans 3/9/2009:

“Rather than helping to cure the economic malaise, the Republicans have dusted off their credo from the days of the Great Depression: “If you can’t sit at the head of the table, piss in the soup!” The obstructionist tactics they employed at that time helped President Franklin Roosevelt get elected to four consecutive terms. And what did the Republicans learn from that? Well, they introduced the Constitutional Amendment that now prevents any President from getting elected to more than two terms.”

From Read All About It 2/17/2010:

“I am reminded of what Boss Tweed of Tammany Hall once said about Thomas Nast: 'Stop them pictures. I don’t care what the papers write about me. My constituents can’t read. But, damn it, they can see the pictures.' The constituents of today’s politicians do not read, but they do watch television... What bothers me is the mainstream media [and television networks]. They have traditionally felt a civic obligation to keep the public informed. Keeping the public informed means more than simply reporting statements that you know are lies; it means revealing the lies as lies and the hypocrisy as hypocrisy.”

From A Return To Sanity 4/1/2010:

“As I have said before, I honestly believe that the survival of the Republican Party depends on the ability of its leadership to move it back to the center. I do not envy them. This is going to be a very difficult and risky task. They have danced with the devil, and he is not going to settle for a good night kiss.“

From Arrogance Of Wealth 7/28/2010:

“The Republicans sided with the insurance companies over the issue of health care reform. They sided with Wall Street over regulations to reform our financial institutions. They are now siding with the oil companies over liability for spills and compensation to the victims of those spills. They are siding with the wealthy over taxes while trying to deny the victims of this recession the benefits of unemployment insurance. How many ways can you say bought and paid for?”

From A Dismal Field 9/13/2011:

“Rich Perry: I won’t say, “this dog don’t hunt.” What I will say is that all he brings back are skunks. He calls Social Security a fraudulent ponzi scheme. He is in favor of the Ryan plan that would turn Medicare into a private voucher program. He even said that the progressive income tax is unconstitutional. These and other extreme right wing opinions are stated in his book 'Fed Up.'”

From Nothing To Offer 4/5/2012:

“The season in which mastodon bellows at mastodon, across the primeval swamp of reactionary politics is almost over. The oligopoly is asserting its will. Although a few rogues are still holding out, the pachyderms are falling in line. That they are not exactly singing songs of joy as they fall in line is to be expected. All they have to unite them is their hatred of President Obama.”

From Embarrassed Texans Are Not Alone 4/6/2013:

“Indeed, to those of us who are more rational it seems as though Texans have such a low opinion of all government that they consider political offices to be good, out of the way, places to deposit their lunatics and dumb asses.”

From Mocking Stupid 8/31/2013:

“The Republican dullards there [in North Carolina] actually buried an anti-choice provision into a bill prohibiting the establishment of Sharia law. What, did they think the pro-choice people would be laughing so hard over the absurdity of outlawing something already prohibited by the Constitution that they would not notice the anti-choice provision?”

From Cash Kashkari 5/31/2014:
“He [Neel Kashkari] wants us to believe he will make a better Governor than a politician would because “politicians don’t know how to earn money.” What? Does this lunkhead think the government should be a profit making organization or that politicians should use their elected offices to make as much money for themselves as they can?”

From Malpractice 7/29/2014:
“The Republicans have been fishing for votes in the shallow end of the IQ pool for over a decade now. I suppose the inevitable question is whether they have hooked stupid or stupid has hooked them. Either way, they now own it.”

From Rudy Rude 2/20/2015:

“Rudy Giuliani must have recently visited Florida to look at the ass prints he left there on the road to the white house. I say this because his envy over where President Obama resides is all too apparent.”

From Snippy Snippets 4/10/2015:

“The Republicans are trying to sell us the same wooden nickels they were selling at the time of the robber barons and well into the nineteen thirties, and they are still pitching the same bitch they pitched back then: “Big Government and Socialism are taking this country to hell in a hand basket,” they bark. If that were true I am sure the indignity of being carted off to hell in a hand basket rather than an Armani Bag would be particularly odious to them!”

From Go Left My Lady 4/12/2015
"Up until Ronald Reagan it was Democrats who talked about the undo influence “special interests” had on the Republican Party. What the Democrats meant by special interests were large corporations, the Chamber of Commerce, and the large financial institutions (you know, the people who crashed the economy in 2008). Reagan turned that issue on its head by re-defining “special interests” to mean labor unions, environmental groups, etc. (you know, the people who fought for living wages, safe work places, and the preservation of a beautiful place to live, work and play)."

From Forced Ignorance 6/13/2015:

“The only intelligent people who think ignorance is bliss are the people who blissfully exploit the ignorant!”

From Daddy's GOP 9/13/2015:

“...President Eisenhower saved the Republican Party by pulling it, kicking and screaming, to the political center. The problem is that this victory over the lunatic right was not complete. Like the Herpes Zoster virus that causes chicken pox and shingles, right wing paranoia and stupidity can never be purged from the body politic. And there are always Republican demagogues who are eager to stir up the fear and loathing that allows those right wing lunatics to re-emerge.”

From We Are The Losers 10/29/2015:

“... Privatization is what this villainization of Government and entitlements is all about. The Republicans want to throw your retirement funds to the Wall Street wolves. They do not care if you starve because your retirement fund fell victim to one of Goldman Sachs' 'shitty deals' or you fell victim to another Madoff or Keating. In fact, they want to serve the Greedy Old Plutocrats by removing any regulations that might protect you from such 'shitty deals.'”

From De Farce 11/11/2015:

“As the great God of Republican victimization knows, only a blasphemous liberal would fact check a Republican! Indeed, fact checking Republicans is like body checking people who are on crutches. How dare you trip up the willfully ignorant demagogues with facts!”

From Shame 11/20/2015:

“It is not really the events in France that are the causing this fear mongering; the heinous attacks there are just an excuse. The real cause of the fear mongering is a moral and intellectual bankruptcy that leaves the demagogues nothing else to sell!”

From Chickenhawk Guano 12/5/2015:
"What the Republicans are really protecting is free enterprise run amuck [rather than the second amendment]; they and the NRA are protecting the market – the ability of the gun manufacturers to remain neutral in the fight against terrorists and to sell arms to both sides."

Thank You EPI

See http://www.epi.org/publication/the-top-charts-of-2015/  (Sorry, it appears as though the EPI site has been hacked and the link I tried to provide here does not work.  Try a search. They will probably solve the problem soon.)

I am sure the Republicans will be quick to point out that as EPI said in its article entitled “Top Charts of 2015:”

“... the economy remains far from fully recovered—and is still failing ordinary Americans, who have endured decades of stagnant wages despite working more productively than ever.

But [what the Republicans will not tell you is that] the charts also make clear that it doesn’t have to be this way. They show that policies that enhance low- and middle-income Americans’ economic leverage—such as keeping interest rates low, raising the minimum wage, making it easier for workers to bargain collectively, expanding access to overtime pay, and eliminating discriminatory practices that contribute to gender inequality—can go far toward creating an economy where prosperity is broadly shared.”

In other words what you get from starve the beast and trickle down are stagnant wages, and what the Democrats have been trying to do would work if the Republicans stopped blocking them. The EPI' charts and EPI's comments about what the charts demonstrate are really quite illuminating! It is a pity that the woeful believers supporting Trump and other right wing Republicans are not bright enough to look at or understand the evidence, but that is just the way they are.

Let us not engage in a futile task. Let the base Republicans* wallow in the fear and loathing so generously supplied to them by demagogues like Trump and Cruz. Fortunately those people, who are suffering from bottom runger syndrome and refuse to share even when sharing is in their best interests, are in the minority. This is not a country where people have traditionally asked “who am I better than?” Rather it is a country where people have traditionally asked “how much better can I become?”

So let us focus our attention on the majority of our citizens and appeal to their better nature. You know the majority; they are the productive people who understand that resolute actions on behalf of all our citizens benefit everyone, whereas divisive tantrums born from ill-informed frustrations benefit no one! As I said in a post entitled “Farewell Mario,” Mario Cuomo reminded us that “this country is at its best when it offers opportunities to all and struggles to right its historical wrongs. It is at its best when it rewards the hard work of the many rather than trying to satiate the greed of the few.” It is Mr. Cuomo's appeal to our better nature and his belief about what makes our country so great that now distinguishes Democrats from Republicans. The evidence presented by EPI shows that following this better part of our nature is also a better economic plan than the failed Ayn Rand alternative the Republicans want to continue inflicting on us!

*In the unlikely event that the Trumpster or the Canadian Texas Turd should read this post, I am sure they would cast aside their objections to political correctness long enough to criticize me for calling their supporters base Republicans rather than the Republican base. Sorry but “base” (used as a pejorative adjective) is a fitting description of people who are so desperately afraid of a democracy in which they no longer constitute the majority that they fall easy prey to the dangerous fear mongering of divisive demagogues.

Incompetence or Worse

When Martin O'Malley ranted about the restrictive debate schedule set up by the DNC I thought he was over-reacting. I have changed my mind. I do not want to act like a Republican by poisoning the well or by throwing unsubstantiated accusations at anyone, but Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and the DNC could not have picked better times to hold the last two debates if their intention was to decrease the number of people watching those debates. This is not lost on the supporters of Bernie Sanders and Martin O'Malley. They, the people who favor Sanders or O'Malley, are convinced that Wasserman-Schultz is purposely limiting the exposure of all the candidates so that the one with the most recognizable name (Hillary Clinton) will win.  Needless to say that the people who do not favor Hillary Clinton are screaming foul over this perceived stacking of the deck.

Whether those accusations are correct or not, the small number of debates and the scheduling of those debates is outrageous and horribly ill-advised. Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and Martin O'Malley do not need the DNC to protected them from themselves by limiting their exposure; they are not factually challenged Republicans with foot in mouth disease.* All of those Democratic candidates are very competent people who have something important to say about the issues. Doing anything that decreases the number of people who will hear what those candidates have to say is as bad as imposing conditions that decrease the voter turn out. We are Democrats! We are better than that! We do not simply go along. We want to hear all serious candidates so that we can make informed decisions. Furthermore, decreasing the number of people who watch the Democratic debates leaves center stage to the Republicans. And abandoning center stage to the Republicans is not what anyone with more than a beer soaked peanut for a brain would call a winning tactic!

*People get foot in mouth disease; whereas animals get hoof in mouth disease. Although with so many of the fear mongering Republicans acting like crazed bulls it is easy to understand why someone might get the two confused.

Fascist?

Who are You Calling a Fascist?  There is little doubt that Donald Trump can out demagogue, out fear monger, and out pout any fascist!

Yeah, but can he make the trains run on time?

Chickenhawk Guano

The Republicans say they are tougher than the Democrats and that they, the Greedy Old Plutocrats, will “keep us safe.” Yet a Republican Controlled Congress does not even have the courage or good sense to authorize the use of force against Daesh (ISIS) or to pass legislation to prevent people on the terrorist watch list from buying assault weapons. So how are the Republicans going to keep us safe? Their great plan is the same as always: make sure that every man and woman can buy big bad guns. That's right, they want to take us back to yesteryear when people were too self reliant to depend on law enforcement officers and often resolved their differences in the time honored tradition of the Hatfields and McCoys or the Earps and Clantons.

That ought to fix it! Those damned terrorists, no matter how well armed, will have to think twice before committing heinous acts when even granny is packing heat and ready to shoot. Never mind the fact that turban wearing Sikhs and young black men wearing hoodies are very likely to get shot just because someone thought they were a threat. The Republicans will express their regret over such tragic mistakes. They will even urge us to pray for the victims, but they will also tell us those deaths were a small price to pay for the security guns provide us.

This whole thing about the Republicans protecting Second Amendment Rights is pure chickenhawk guano. What the Republicans are really protecting is free enterprise run amuck; they and the NRA are protecting the market – the ability of the gun manufacturers to remain neutral in the fight against terrorists and to sell arms to both sides. And many Republicans, such as Trump, are doing this while insulting Muslims who could be our allies.

Far from keeping us safe or protecting us, the Republicans are increasing the dangers we face!

God Won't Fix It

Dailykos called this article in the New York Daily News the best response to the San Bernardino shootings, and I agree. But words, no matter how poignant they may be, are not enough. Thirteen people were murdered and twenty were injured. Praying for these victims is not going to do any good either, particularly when the hypocrites calling for the prayers are highly paid lackey's of the NRA. It ain't God flooding the streets with so many guns that virtually anyone can obtain one.

If you are so gullible and paranoid that you believe the government is going to take your guns away from you, you just might be dangerous enough to make serious people consider whether or not you should own a gun. Even so, there are very few people who would advocate taking your guns unless you commit a violent crime or demonstrate that you are a threat to others or health care professionals say you are a danger to yourself and/or others. 

I am a gun owner and I know many responsible gun owners; we all favor responsible gun control!  It is time for all of us to stand up to the NRA and its fear mongering. Lives are more important than the gun manufacturers profits! Demand reasonable gun laws and let the politicians know you will vote against anyone who does not support such gun legislation!

SHAME!

Thanks to the demagogues, primarily Republicans, we have to edit the inscription on the Statue of Liberty as follows:

“Don't give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses, yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Don't send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,

I lift light my no lamp beside the golden door.”

The xenophobic demagogues always blame the victims. They turned away the Jews fleeing Nazi Germany. Now they are turning away Muslims fleeing Assad's barrel bombs and the brutality of Daesh (ISIS). The Demagogues (particularly Republicans) are using fear and prejudice to make sure only the right sort of people are allowed to enter this country: No Mexicans or non-Christians or non-Europeans are allowed.

How many times will we Americans fall for this fear mongering? How many times will we forget what makes us great and exceptional? How many times must we apologize for not doing the right thing because we did not have the courage to stand up to the xenophobic demagogues who pose a much greater threat to our values than do the terrorists?  

It is not really the events in France that are the causing this fear mongering; the heinous attacks there are just an excuse.  The real cause of the fear mongering is a moral and intellectual bankruptcy that leaves the demagogues nothing else to sell!

Unfair to Middling

It's unfair: there are idiots to the right and reformers to the left; what's a Wall Street Plutocrat to do? The Republican demagogues are eager to do the plutocrats' bidding, but the idiots they exploit are so viciously retrogressive and nihilistic that the Republican demagogues cannot win national elections. Come on, Carson and Trump, you have to be kidding! Ah, but hope springs eternal for the Wall Street Plutocrats. They still have the power of money. They can still create super-packs, and they can create think tanks to tell the bought politicians what to say. The progressives, like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, may be pushing Democrats like Hillary Clinton to the left, but those progressives have not won yet! The Democrats that are sympathetic to the Wall Street plutocrats or who are financially dependent on those plutocrats offer a third way between the idiots and the progressives.

In other words, the plutocrats are trying to take advantage of a split they see in the Democratic Party. Of that split JIm Tankersley wrote in the Washington Post:

“... One side believes what's gone wrong for the middle class is that wealthy and powerful players have rewritten the tax code, trade deals, labor law and other policies in order to advantage themselves, at the expense of workers. Middle-class stagnation, in this view, is a choice that can be corrected by shifting power back to workers, at the bargaining table and elsewhere.

The other side, the Third Way side, believes [or wants us to believe] that the stagnation is a natural consequence of a globalizing economy, which has disproportionately benefited people with high skills and people who own stock, businesses and other forms of capital. That's the story Kodak is meant to represent. Its demise wasn't imposed by someone else's policy choice, it was a failure of the company to adapt. To boost the middle-class, by that logic, workers need to be given the means to adapt.”

Notice that in the preceding paragraph Mr. Tankersley referred to the non-progressive side as the “Third Way” side. This is because the Plutocrats have established a “ Wall Street-funded Democratic think tank called Third Way.” As Richard Eskow reports in commondreams.org:

“Third Way has released a lengthy report that argues an inequality-based, populist theme will doom Democrats. Its board member, former White House Chief of Staff (and JPMorgan Chase executive) Bill Daley, even insisted to HuffPo’s Stein that Sanders’ political positions are “a recipe for disaster.

The Third Way report is available online. It introduces a number of catchphrases, often paired in threes: the Hopscotch Workforce, the Nickel-and-Dimed Workforce, and the Asset-Starved Workforce; Stalling Schools, the College Well, and Adult Atrophy; the Upside-Down Economy, the Anywhere Economy, and the Malnourished Economy.

Sadly, most of the content amounts to Misleading Minutiae, Gimmicky Wordplay, and Downright Deception.”

As Mr. Tankersley so aptly wrote: “Third Way’s argument against inequality as a leading source of our current economic woes puts them directly at odds with leading economists, including Nobel Prize winner Joseph Stiglitz. “Politicians typically talk about rising inequality and the sluggish recovery as separate phenomena,” Stiglitz wrote in 2013, “when they are in fact intertwined. Inequality stifles, restrains and holds back our growth.”

So now we come down to the Democratic Debate held last night and what we can learn from it (besides the fact that it was an incredibly stupid idea to schedule it at a time that put it up against college football, particularly Pac 12 football, particularly in the second largest television market in the nation where NFL stands for No Football Locally and fans really follow the college teams!).

What the Democratic debates have revealed so far is that even Hillary Clinton with her connection to Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, and Wall Street has embraced the Progressive explanation for what “has gone wrong for the middle class.” The one thing no one can accuse Hillary of being is stupid. She would not have moved to the left if she did not think a progressive agenda is a winner!

After the October 16 debate Paul Krugman Wrote” 

“Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders had an argument about financial regulation during Tuesday’s debate — but it wasn’t about whether to crack down on banks. Instead, it was about whose plan was tougher. The contrast with Republicans like Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio, who have pledged to reverse even the moderate financial reforms enacted in 2010, couldn’t be stronger.

“For what it’s worth, Mrs. Clinton had the better case. Mr. Sanders has been focused on restoring Glass-Steagall, the rule that separated deposit-taking banks from riskier wheeling and dealing. And repealing Glass-Steagall was indeed a mistake. But it’s not what caused the financial crisis, which arose instead from “shadow banks” like Lehman Brothers, which don’t take deposits but can nonetheless wreak havoc when they fail. Mrs. Clinton has laid out a plan to rein in shadow banks; so far, Mr. Sanders hasn’t.”

During the last debate Hillary pointed out what Paul Krugman wrote in this article. What Hillary did not mention was this important caveat from Robert Borosage in his July 17 article in Campaign For America's Future:

“... in what is becoming a signature of the Clinton campaign, the fundamental problem is addressed with underwhelming reforms. To abandon the culture of short-term speculation, Clinton does not call for a financial speculation tax that might slow computer-driven, nanosecond trading programs. She does not endorse taxing the income of investors at the same rate as the salaries of workers. She doesn’t mention breaking up too-big-to-fail financial institutions or reducing the bloated size of our financial community that helps drive risky financial transactions. She doesn’t penalize companies for excessive CEO compensation packages.”

I might add here that most economists, including Paul Krugman, say that repealing Glass Steagall was a mistake.* I favor restoring Glass Steagall, but I would not argue with Mr. Krugman about what else needs to be done. I cannot tell you whether Hillary Clinton will strengthen what Mr. Borosage called "underwhelming reforms," but her rhetoric is making Wall Street nervous.  The bottom line is that the incompetence of the Republican Party and the emergence of Roosevelt Democrats is dreadful news for the Wall Street Plutocrats who are afraid that their privileged position might actually become middling.

*There are also economists who disagree with Mr. Krugman about whether the repeal of Glass Steagall was a cause of the crash of 2008.  See Glass Steagall Matters!

Sad And Frightening

More than any other animal we human beings are ruled by our expectations. People, such as Crane Brinton, who have studied mass movements and revolutions will tell you that the most dangerous times for any society are when reforms are not bringing about the desired improvements fast enough or when people think they are losing ground and what they have is being taken away from them.

In many ways America is experiencing both of these things. As the folks of Black Lives Matter will tell you: in spite of the tremendous improvement in race relations since the 1960's, racism is still a problem which is too often deadly for African Americans! They demand changes and they demand them now! At the same time middle age white working class people are undergoing a crises that undermines some of our most cherished assumptions.

The New York Times Reports that an analysis by two Princeton economists, Angus Deaton, who last month won the 2015 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Science, and Anne Case shows that:

“Something startling is happening to middle-aged white Americans. Unlike every other age group, unlike every other racial and ethnic group, unlike their counterparts in other rich countries, death rates in this group have been rising, not falling.” The analysis by Dr. Deaton and Dr. Case indicates that in middle age, poorly educated American whites “are dying at such a high rate that they are increasing the death rate for the entire group of middle-aged white Americans.”

Indeed, “[t]he mortality rate for whites 45 to 54 years old with no more than a high school education increased by 134 deaths per 100,000 people from 1999 to 2014.” Sadly “... the death rates among this group are being driven not by the big killers like heart disease and diabetes but by an epidemic of suicides and afflictions stemming from substance abuse:alcoholic liver disease and overdoses of heroin and prescription opioids.”

What could account for this? In the period examined by Dr. Deaton and Dr. Case, the “inflation-adjusted income for households headed by a high school graduate fell by 19 percent.“ So as Dartmouth economists, Ellen Meara and Jonathan S. Skinner, noted in a commentary to the Deaton-Case analysis to be published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences “...[t]he least educated also had the most financial distress.”

What frightens me is that we now have African Americans being killed and white people killing themselves. Both groups are feeling desperate. This is a situation that is almost ideal for a demagogue who wants to pit one group of people against another. Be cautious, my friends. Be very, very cautious! For decades now we have been hearing complaints by white people who believe welfare and other social programs unfairly require them to pay for the sins of their fathers long after the need to compensate the victims has passed. Unfortunately the group of white people who are suffering the most in this economy, as manufacturers move overseas and unions are destroyed, are the people who have only a high school education or less, and they are the very people who are most inclined to fall for the blame the victims tactics employed by demagogues who want to pit different groups against each other. After all, demagogues are not bothered by difficult complexities; they can make it very simple: “Just deport all immigrants, stop all affirmative action, and do away with the safety net programs you have to pay for and everything will be all right again,” they say.

What the uneducated cannot seem to grasp is that taxes are a rather small component of real income. In fact the wages earned by workers have now become so small that the percentage of people who are required to pay income taxes has dropped significantly. Furthermore, with real incomes decreasing the working class is becoming more dependent on the safety nets they have been paying for all these years. And it is not the exploited minorities that are causing the decrease in wages. So oppressing minorities will not accomplish anything but resistance. We are in a very dangerous place right now. We have to do something to restore the dignity and incomes of our workers, and we have to do it before their desperation blinds them to all reason. Too many of them are already being hoodwinked by the Greedy Old Plutocrats as it is.

If you look back at a time when we manufactured things, when labor unions were strong, and when the middle class was the great engine of prosperity you will see that the disparity in wealth between the top 2 or 3 percent and everyone else was much less than it is now! And everyone prospered at that time; the top 2 or 3 percent were still very well off, and it was reasonable for the rest of us to believe our children would be better off than we were. Enriching the rich only exacerbates our current problems, as do bad trade agreements. I cannot tell you I have all the answers but I can tell you that the Republicans with their enrich the rich, trickle down theory will only make things worse. It is only through the collective strength we can exert through our government that we can make things better. We have to vote the special interests out. We desperately need an aggressive and progressive government! That is why I intend to vote for Bernie Sanders.

De Farce

I have to admit that I did not watch most of the so called Republican debate last night. What I saw of it told me it was, unfortunately, the sort of farce one would expect from the Fox disinformation factory. As the great God of Republican victimization knows, only a blasphemous liberal would fact check a Republican! Indeed, fact checking Republicans is like body checking people who are on crutches. How dare you trip up the willfully ignorant demagogues with facts! This sanctimonious display of ignorant indignation from the nitwits seeking the Republican nomination is an insult to the intelligence of anyone with an average IQ. What makes this farce even worse is that most of the participants were actually quoting from their stump speeches; which is about the only thing Marco Rubio does well. Sorry folks, but the outrageous and unchallenged falsehoods told by the prospective candidates made me so angry that I had to change the channel! Although I did not hear enough to give you a detailed accounting of the proceedings, I did hear enough to form the following opinions.

Democrats want to take us into the future with the successful policies of the past. Republicans want to take us into the future with the failed policies of the past. The Democrats deal with real information: this is what was done in the past and this is what worked. The Republicans are trying to sell us ignorance: forget about what happened in the past it's time to try something new, they say. But new for them is old, it is doing away with all of the regulations that protect us from monopolies, unsafe products, and unfair trade practices, as well as doing away with the graduated income tax, all of the safety nets and earned benefits programs such as Social Security and Medicare, while giving huge tax breaks to the rich and stuffing the coffers of the military industrial complex with your money (President Eisenhower must be rolling over in his grave).

The Queen of sanctimonious falsehoods is Carly Fiorina. She claims that all regulations hurt small businesses and rails against Dodd Frank. She obviously thinks the Koch Bros. are small businessmen! She would never admit that there are some regulations such as anti-trust laws and fair lending laws that protect and help small businesses. Furthermore, Dodd Frank was not even a glimmer in the eyes of Mr. Dodd or Mr. Frank before or during the crash of 1929 or the crash of 2008. I might add that Glass Steagall was not a factor in the Crash 1929 or 2008 either. In point of fact both Dodd Frank and Glass Steagall were reactions to the abuses that caused those crashes! To put it bluntly, Carly Fiorina is a certifiable liar: See Fiorina Lies, Fiorina is lying, Fiorina's fetus claim.  No wonder she hates fact checkers.

When the likes of Donald Trump and Ben Carson are the leading prospective candidates for your Party's Presidential nomination there are no winners.

Oh The Humors!

Forget about the West Point Kerfuffle. There is something far worse about Dr. Ben Carson. As a very competent, modern physician, Dr. Carson has correctly rejected the once prevalent theory of humors that caused doctors to purge and bleed their patients. But as an incompetent, reactionary politician he still embraces the fallacious Trickle Down theory hypotheses that would cause him to starve the beast, which is the equivalent of purging and bleeding the economy. This is political quackery of the first order. He would commit governmental malpractice if we were ever foolish enough to elect him.

Democratic Forum 2016

I am glad I watched the Democratic Forum last night. MSNBC and Winthrop University did such a good job of organizing it that they made it look easy. I have say though that it takes someone with the talent of the late Tim Russert or Rachel Maddow to transform this format into something that is both entertaining and informative. One of the problems from an entertainment standpoint is that this format does not provide the drama of candidates directly confronting each other as they would in a debate. While there is still the possibility of a candidate embarrassing himself or herself with the sort of excited utterances wimpy Republican candidates always blame on “gotcha questions” propounded by “liberal media” persons, you only get those utterances when a candidate moves away from his or her talking points!

Rachel Maddow has a real talent for drawing out the personalities of the people she interviews and an almost uncanny ability to ask tough questions in a manner that does not seem confrontational or combative. She admits to having that famous liberal bias you cannot find anywhere else, but she also has that famous commercial bias you can find everywhere else! Which is to say that she throws hard balls; she just does not snarl at you while throwing them at your head. For instance, she asked Martin O'Malley about his low standing in the polls and how he was addressing that. Bernie Sanders has been criticized about his stand on gun control and gun rights; so she asked him questions about that criticism and where he stood on gun control issues. Hillary Clinton has been criticized about her ties to Wall Street and for being a war hawk; Rachel asked Hillary questions about both of those subjects. All of the candidates held up well to the questioning without adding the sort of ignorant embellishments that get so many Republicans in trouble. I might add that both Martin O'Malley and Bernie Sanders also criticized Hillary Clinton, but there was nothing that sensational about the criticisms.

What made this forum interesting was not the excitement of conflict. It was not like watching a boxing match. It was more like watching the dating game as Rachel Maddow tried to draw the candidates out so we could get to know more about them, and they tried to accentuate their positives while minimizing their negatives.

Martin O'Malley: He appeared to be the most rehearsed and seemed to stick the closest to his talking points. The fact that he was given as much time as the other candidates, however, allowed him to paint an appealing picture of himself. He demonstrated that he is a candidate who deserves some serious consideration.

Bernie Sanders: He appeared to be the most spontaneous. He was funny and charming as well as informative. He did well in answering questions regarding race and civil rights. Rachel Maddow also did him a favor by showing a picture of him at a sit-in protesting the segregated housing at the University of Chicago in the nineteen sixties. Bernie has a stellar civil rights record but young people are about today, and Bernie has a lot of ground to make up on Hillary when it comes to African Americans. He is addressing more racial issues now, but his big thing is still the economic mess. I really bless him for his economic message, but I want to give him a bit of advice in regard to racial issues. I am hoping that someone who has been as committed to the cause of civil rights as he has will not think I am being arrogant.

Bernie knew that African Americans, particularly young males, are more likely than white males to be arrested or beaten or shot by law enforcement officers. I am also sure that those facts really bothered him. Yet when he was confronted by Black Lives Matter he said what I have to admit I would have said. He said: “Of course black lives matter. All lives matter!” The folks of Black Lives Matter (probably correctly) interpreted this to mean that as a white person Bernie did not feel the urgency they felt about reducing the disproportionate risk black people face. “Justice delayed is justice denied” becomes much more poignant when the delay is measured in lives ruined or lost. The folks of Black Lives Matter want to see a sense of urgency, they want to see the fire Bernie had in his eyes at that sit in when he was a young man!  Bernie should thank them for making him feel young again by putting that fire back in his eyes. Go Bernie!

Hillary Clinton: Hillary was well prepared and stuck to her talking points without giving the appearance of being too well rehearsed. In spite of her normal reserve, she showed enough of her personality to court her audience. South Carolina is a state where the African American vote is crucial to Democrats, and Hillary hit hard on the issues that are important to African Americans. The woman is a consummate professional and that is a good thing.

We Are The Losers

Everyone wants to conjecture about who won or lost the last Republican debate. I cannot tell you who the winner is, but I can sure tell you who the losers are; we are the losers! That is right, we the people are being had! It is not the government that is the problem. The problem is the Republican Party. What we saw on the stage last night was a con job pure and simple!

As Robert Borosage wrote in his Oct 29, 2015 Campaign For America's Future article, “The Republican Debate: Bring In The Clowns:”

“These Republicans – other than Jeb – have learned to appeal to the populist temper of the times. They are most compelling as they detail the decline of the middle class, the rise of the 1 percent, the stagnation of incomes. They rail about our corrupted politics, about crony capitalism, big corporations using big government to crush the little guy. They condemn loopholes and tax lawyers. Cruz pledges that under his tax plan “hedge fund millionaires” will pay the same rate as their secretaries (not mentioning that they will pocket an obscene tax break in the process). When talking about little guy, these folks sound like Bernie Sanders protégés; they feel the Bern.

Of course, their answer to all this is to savage government. Big government (not counting the military) is the root of all evil. Their tax plans (and imperial fantasies) would require elimination of virtually every function of government, while doling out huge tax breaks to the richest Americans. Their regulatory rollbacks would free up the banks, the drug companies, the corporate behemoths, insuring epidemics of fraud and abuse. And with the exception of Huckabee and Trump, they seem intent on cutting Social Security and Medicare, adding to our looming retirement crisis.” Also see Wealth Gap 101 in this blog under the label of “important.”

Social Security And Entitlements: As you may have noticed I frequently call the Republican Party the party of fear and loathing. When it comes to scare tactics they do not confine themselves to phony issues like Benghazi. In fact their favorite bogey men are the dreaded entitlement programs, meaning the earned benefits programs you have been paying into. And they lie like rugs about those programs. Social Security is not in danger of going broke! Every economist who has looked at this will tell you there is a very easy fix for any shortfall. Why should someone earning forty or fifty thousand dollars a year pay taxes on the full amount of his earnings while someone earning a million dollars a year pays taxes on only one quarter of his earnings? It does not make any sense. Simply raise the ceiling on the earnings taxed and the problem is solved.

So why are the Republicans trying to scare the hell out of people who are not old enough to collect Social Security by telling them that Social Security will not be there for them when they are old enough to qualify for it? Jeb Bush's brother George gave us the answer to that question when he tried to privatize Social Security. Privatization is what this villainization of Government and entitlements is all about. The Republicans want to throw your retirement funds to the Wall Street wolves. They do not care if you starve because your retirement fund fell victim to one of Goldman Sachs' “shitty deals” or you fell victim to another Madoff or Keating. In fact, they want to serve the Greedy Old Plutocrats by removing any regulations that might protect you from such “shitty deals.” As long as the brokers, bankers, and investment firms are well paid the Republicans will trumpet the success of free enterprise! This is all about making billionairs trillionaires. Why else would Paul Ryan try to turn Medicare into a private voucher system?

Taxes and Trade: I am not just making this up. Fact check it. A flat tax of ten percent or fifteen percent is a huge tax break for the rich and a tax increase for people on the lower end of the earning scale, and it will greatly increase the Federal Deficit. What so many Republican candidates advocating such a flat tax should tell you is that the Republican Party's panic over the deficit is both absurd and disingenuous. They are obviously more than willing to increase the deficit to give tax breaks to the rich. With the exception of Donald Trump no Republican mentioned the one deficit that is a problem. What I am talking about is the trade deficit! If you have a trade surplus your ability to pay your debts is self evident. That is not true if you have a trade deficit. And if that trade deficit is increasing it will not be long before your creditors will react to the risk by raising the interest rate on what you borrow, thereby increasing the amount you must pay on the debt!

The only Republican who told the truth was Ohio Governor John Kasich when he began the debate by saying: “We are on the verge, perhaps, of picking someone who cannot do this job. I’ve watched to see people say that we should dismantle Medicare and Medicaid and leave the senior citizens out – out in the – in the cold. I’ve heard them talk about deporting 10 or 11 [million ]– people here from this country out of this country, splitting families. I’ve heard about tax schemes that don’t add up, that put our kids in – in a deeper hole than they are today.”

We deserve better than this! We must vote for better than this – not just in the Presidential elections but in the state and midterm elections as well!

Back to Salem

It is fitting that Hillary Clinton should be hauled before the Benghazi committee so close to Halloween because this alleged hearing has all the credibility of the Salem Witch trials. There is no way that anyone who watched Hillary Clinton being grilled for eleven hours by gougey Gowdy, et al. can doubt that Kevin McCarthy was telling the truth when he said the Republicans are holding the Benghazi hearings for the purpose of driving down Hillary Clinton's favorability ratings.

The Republicans are trying to justify this farce by saying they discovered new information from Hillary's emails. I find that very interesting since there were no new discoveries revealed during the eleven hours of her testimony. Ah, but the Republicans never let go of any allegation! “It's the emails!” they shout. “Hillary Clinton has to be hiding something truly nefarious in those emails! She is a Clinton, you know?”

So emails became the star of the show regardless of the fact that emails were not the favored means of communication for Hillary Clinton or the rest of the State Department. “Oh look at this big stack of emails form 2011 about Benghazi, and this little stack of emails from 2012 about Benghazi. Does that mean you lost interest in Benghazi in 2012?” This was actually one of the absurd lines of questioning!

In particular the Republicans focused in on emails to and from Sidney Blumenthal, even though he was not a part of the State Department. But what the hell do facts have to do with anything? Hillary passed some of Blumenthal's comments about Benghazi on to members of her staff and others, and that was enough for Republicans to characterize Blumenthal as Hillary's advisor on Benghazi. One of the reasons Mr. Gowdy was so eager to embrace the notion of Mr. Blumenthal being Hillary's advisor is because of Mr. Blumenthal's vitriolic criticism of some members of Obama's cabinet. As a prosecutor Mr. Gowdy knows how prejudicial that criticism is as evidence, but fairness is not what Mr. Gowdy was after. I might add here that Republicans seem to have a hard time understanding friendship. Just because you do not correct something a friend says in private does not mean you agree with him. One GOP idiot even asked asked why a friend, Sidney Blumenthal, should have Hillary's home phone number and address while a colleague, Ambassador Stevens, did not.

I think the biggest problem with the hearings, however, is that few people could watch them and even fewer did watch them. What this means is that most of the people who are interested (and there are too few who are) will depend on what the lame stream media chooses to report. I have already been subjected to how absurd that is by KTLA this morning. Those dumb asses were actually characterizing as a new revelation an email from Hillary in which she said terrorists attacked the complex at Benghazi. The confusion over what was being reported to Hillary and others directly after the attack is well documented and has been discussed ad nauseam. The reports were contradictory and this email added nothing new! My point is that what happened at Hillary's hearing is less important than what people think happened. So keep a close eye on the lazy slugs of the lame stream media who know that dramatic sound bites will allow them to sell more beer than complex facts will!

What A Difference

The Republicans have gone from the clown shows of 2011-12 to the shabby shows of 2015. Their debates, and I am using the term very loosely, have degenerated into contests to see “who can out bark the barker” to emerge as top dog. They cannot argue or discuss policies because all of them are pandering to people who do not think the government should do anything. So each prospective Republican candidate seems to be saying: “I am the one who really shares your anger. I will make the nasty realities go away and give the rest of the world the finger for you.”

As I said in a previous post (“Robert Borosage On the Bern”): “People who respond favorably to the bellicose Trump- eting of the faux elephant- have only this vague notion that they should be fighting mad at something or someone; they are not bright enough to figure out what or who they should be fighting or why! ...Bernie Sanders' followers, on the other hand, have New Dealer expectations; they are actually demanding a government that will work for them again.”

My point being that as Donald Trump has turned the Republican Primary into a bully roaring contest, Bernie Sanders has turned the Democratic primary into a progressive or liberal policy contest. I think it was Hillary Clinton who said during the debate that it was time for a “new New Deal.” I might add here that Bernie's popularity has obviously pushed Hillary farther to the left, and that is a good thing!

So who won the first Democratic Debate? The Democratic Party did. I say this because I believe a majority of the people of this nation really want a government that will work for them to solve problems such as the great disparity in wealth between the top 1 or 2 percent and everyone else. As far as individual candidates are concerned, I do not think there was a clear winner. But here is my assessment:

Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton were clearly the stars of the show, and neither of them was upstaged. Martin O'Malley needed a spectacular performance to command attention. To use a baseball analogy, he hit a lot of singles but did not drive in any runs. While that ain't bad, it won't get him into the all star game. I think Lincoln Chafee and Jim Webb also fell short of what they needed to do to move up to the big game.

Lame stream drama. Debates over policies and qualifications are interesting, even visceral in many instances, but they tend to draw a wonky group rather than an excited crowd. So it was only natural for moderator, Anderson Cooper, to crank up the drama by using some of the crap the Republicans use to rile up their nihilistic base. Thus we had the inevitable questions about Benghazi, Hillary's e-mails, and, horror of all horrors, “Bernie's socialism.”

As with Hillary's overall performance, her defense regarding Benghazi and her e-mails was very competent and workman like. It was, however, Bernie Sander's defense of Hillary Clinton that had the crowd cheering.

"The American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails," Sanders said. "Enough of the emails. Let's talk about the real issues facing America." Sanders then went on to tell us what is really important. “We have 27 million people living in poverty,” he said. “We have massive wealth and inequality. It's cost us millions of decent jobs. The American people want to know about whether they'll have a democracy or an oligarchy.”

What pundits would define as a tough question elicited a well deserved slap down by Hillary, by Bernie, and by the audience. Nothing could define the difference between Democrats and Republicans better than Bernie's comments and the reaction to them. The Republicans are trying to sell fear and anti government loathing. The Democrats are trying to sell real policies to deal with real problems. In this regard I think the drama Anderson Cooper got was not at all what he expected. Ah, but there was still the dreaded bogey man called socialism!

When Bernie was asked if he was a capitalist, he said: "Do I not consider myself part of the casino capitalist process by which so few have so much and so many have so little, by which Wall Street's greed and recklessness wrecked this economy? No, I don't."

When Hillary challenged him on his socialistic views Bernie said he was not against the small businesses in this country. The way Bernie defines Democratic Socialism is not much different than Hillary's definition of a new New Deal. Bernie favors stronger reforms than Hillary does, and he is generally more combative in regard to bringing about those reforms. But the differences between Hillary and Bernie are not great enough to make Bernie's supporters stay home if Hillary wins the nomination. Hopefully Hillary's supporters will support Bernie if he is nominated.

A question I have is whether Bernie won over any African American or Hispanic voters. I think he did well in answering questions from Black Lives Matter, but so did Hillary.

No, I Really Mean Lunatics!

Recently some Republican friends (amazingly I do still have some friends who are Republicans) have challenged my description of right wing extremists as lunatics. I stand by my description! I know that mental health care professionals are critical of terms like insanity and lunatic, but I am not going to argue the semantics. Those terms, though often misused, are a short hand way of saying something is not right in the head, and we judge whether that is true by the symptoms the lunatics or insane people present. Some of those symptoms are: irrational and obsessive fear, an inability to accept reality, and (the Republicans favorite) doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

In regard to irrational and obsessive fear let me toss out a few names: Joseph McCarthy, The John Birch Society, The Tea Party, Cliven Bundy, and Governor Gregg Abbott of Texas. Why Gregg Abbott? Because Abbott did something no rational governor would do; he ordered the Texas National Guard to keep an eye on federal troops because he was afraid the federal government was going to take over Texas by declaring martial law! See my posts: “Paranoid Style of American Politics” and “Paranoia Texas Style.”

In regard to the inability to accept reality and doing the same things over and over while expecting different results the evidence is overwhelming. The latest example of the inability of the lunatic right wing of the Republican Party to accept reality can be seen in the forced resignation of John Boehner as Speaker of the House.

DailyKos' in an article entitled “The Dark Truth Of John Boehner's Resignation,” discussed the contempt the right wing has for John Boehner because of his inability to do the impossible.

DailyKos said that: “when forced to explain this supposed 'contempt' [for Speaker Boener], numerous Republicans (even presidential candidates) list not only Boehner's (non-existent) failure to stop Obamacare, but also his supposed enabling of Obamacare.  As Mike Huckabee explained, 'When people sent [Republicans] here, they didn't send them to give the president more power on Obamacare[.]' Think about that: after total legislative obstruction, a government shut-down, more than 50 votes to repeal Obamacare, an ensuing presidential election, two Supreme Court lawsuits, and other pending litigation - - Republicans are livid with the belief that John Boehner has worked with the President to strengthen Obamacare.

No sane political observer could think that.  So, what gives?  As Jonathan Chait explains, we are witnessing a sort of collective Republican denial where they cannot accept that they are not the ruling party, not the 'deciders' (to use a former president's phrase)[.]”

The inability of the extreme right wing to accept reality, its inability to work within the limitations of its political power, and its inability and/or unwillingness to recognize the best interests of this country and to put those interests ahead of its own interests are causing the Republican Party to repeatedly commit acts that are actually harmful not just to our present government but to the very form of our government. Our democracy, like every other democracy, depends on a balance achieved through compromise.

DailyKos demonstrated how unyielding and harmful the Republican Party has become by presenting Steve Benen's “useful summary of the growing history of the Republican's hostage governing:"

"* April 2011: House Republicans threaten a government shutdown unless Democrats accept GOP demands on spending cuts.

* July 2011: Republicans create the first-ever debt-ceiling crisis, threatening to default on the nation’s debts unless Democrats accept GOP demands on spending cuts.

* September 2011: Republicans threaten another shutdown.

* April 2012: Republicans threaten another shutdown.

* December 2012: Republicans spend months refusing to negotiate in the lead up to the so-called “fiscal cliff.”

* January 2013: Republicans raise the specter of another debt-ceiling crisis.

* September 2013: Republicans threaten another shutdown.

* October 2013: Republicans actually shut down the government.

* February 2014: Republicans raise the specter of another debt-ceiling crisis.

* December 2014: Republicans threaten another shutdown.

* February 2015: Republicans threaten a Department of Homeland Security shutdown.

* September 2015: Republicans threaten another shutdown [over Planned Parenthood]."

Talk about doing the same things over and over and expecting different results.  My only argument with DailyKos is that I would not describe these demented acts as “hostage governing.” Instead I would characterize them as shameful acts of extortionist politics. As I have said in other posts, the Republicans seem to think their actions will not set dangerous precedents that can come back to bite them! I guess they believe Armageddon is just around the corner and there will be no tomorrow. That kind of thinking also seems like insanity to me.

Didn't Say It! Didn't Mean It!

If you are catching hell for what you said, deny saying it or say you did not mean it that way. Forget about the plain meaning of the words; words are open to interpretation, are they not? This sort of denial and obfuscation is particularly important when the gaff you committed reveals something unsavory about you and/or your party. Just ask Representative Kevin McCarthy, who is now trying to cough the Benghazi bone out of his throat.

As Greg Sargent reported in the Washington Post, Kevin McCarthy went on Fox News last night to clean up his comments about Benghazi and failed miserably.

“This committee was set up for one sole purpose, to find the truth on behalf of families for four dead Americans,” McCarthy told Bret Baier. “Now, I did not imply in any way that that work is political, of course it is not. Look at the way they have carried themselves out,” McCarthy said.

Of course he did not “imply” that the Benghazi hearings were politically motivated; there was nothing that subtle about his comment.  He clearly said the hearings were held to discredit Hillary Clinton! There is no other way to interpret it (See my previous post “Witch Hunts And Inquisitions”). While I do not think anyone who heard McCarthy's comment will believe his denial, I will understand if some generous soul commiserates with him for being confused by his own words. After all, a man who says “untrustable” obviously has trouble with the English language!

Some people will defend McCarthy's comments about the Benghazi hearings, others will deny them, but no one will forget them. The problem with the truth is that you cannot successfully hide it after it has been exposed.

Witch Hunts and Inquisitions

When a political party has no viable policies or proposals all it has left to sell is fear and loathing. And how do you stir up fear and loathing? You do it with witch hunts and inquisitions!

Can You Benghazi?

In his Sept 30, 2015 article, “Kevin McCarthy's Truthful Gaffe About Benghazi” E. J. Dionne Jr. wrote:

“Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), the likely successor to House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), told Fox News’s Sean Hannity explicitly on Tuesday night that the Clinton investigation was part of a 'strategy to fight and win.'

He explained:'Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping. Why? Because she’s untrustable. But no one would have known any of that had happened, had we not fought.'”

In Making this stunning admission Representative Kevin McCarty added to the infamy a Senator named Joe attached to the McCarthy surname. I say “stunning admission” only in that it was unbelievably foolish for a high ranking Republican to actually say this out loud and in public! It is rather fitting, however, for a guy named McCarthy to confirm what everyone who was paying the slightest attention already knew about the Benghazi inquisition. Grand inquisitor Issa ruined his credibility during Benghazi hearings, and grand inquisitor Gowdy (or is that gougey) is well on his way to doing the same thing.

Can You Say Planned Parenthood Hearings? 

Alright, lets take a deceptively edited film that was surreptitiously shot (or is that shat) by an unscrupulous anti-abortion group, add some outrageous accusations and lies to it, and start another grand inquisition based on the deceptions. Go ahead, Carly Failurina and her ilk will praise it; they will never question it - at least not in public. And make sure that the witnesses you call find it almost impossible to answer what are supposed to be questions about it because you are constantly interrupting them, usually with absurd accusations. Here are just a few examples of how the alleged planned parenthood hearings are being conducted by the Republican inquisitors.

As Kimberly Truong wrote in Mashable:

During the testimony of Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood, Representative Chaffetz (R. Utah) “...presented a slide claiming that Planned Parenthood's money spent on breast exams has been reduced, while money spent on abortions increased.

Though he claimed that the slide came straight from Planned Parenthood's annual reports, Richards' lawyers told her otherwise, after she said she'd never seen the slide.

'My lawyers just informed me that the source of this information is Americans United for Life, an anti-abortion group. I would check your source,' she said.”

I might add here that the chart was as deceptive as one would expect given its source.

In the following exchange between Ms Richards and grand inquisitor Gowdy, Esq., Mr. Gowdy makes us all wonder what the hell he was taught in law school!

"'I appreciate the way you like to frame the issue — that you're the reasonable one and those of us who have a contrary position are not reasonable,' Gowdy said. 'That's exactly the last answer you gave.'

When Richards argued that he was twisting her words, Gowdy interjected: 'It's not always what you say, just sometimes what you mean,' seeming to wink his right eye at her."

If someone had said that to a witness Mr. Gowdy was representing and he did not start hurling objection such as “badgering the witness, misrepresenting the evidence, and assuming facts not in evidence,” he would be guilty of legal incompetence or malpractice. How the hell did he know what she meant? Is he the Amazing Kreskin?

*Update: Discussion and Correction of Chaffetz Chart.

Impossibly Worse

I know, I was with you when you said Congress cannot possibly get worse than it has been since the 2014 elections.  In fact I have been saying that this congress under John Boehner's speakership is the most dysfunctional congress since the Civil War! Now John Boehner is resigning. I know many of you are tempted to cheer his departure, but before you do that take a minute to think about what has caused this congress to become so dysfunction.

Thanks to the low voter turn out in two mid-term elections and the Republicans' gerrymandering of Congressional districts, the right wing lunatics were given enough power in the House of Representatives to all but force the resignation of Speaker John Boehner. What this means is that even though they are in the minority, the nihilistic extremists have gained control of the House and are close to seizing complete control of the Republican Party. That is what happens when the Republican Party panders to the fears and prejudices of the right wing extremists; the McCarthyites, the John Birchers and the Tea Partiers all attest to that!

As sad as it is to say: the anti-government insanity of the Republican Party combined with the defeat and departure of Mr. Boehner will probably make him seem like the poster boy for reason and compromise. Believe me things can and will get worse if we do not do something about it!

Plop! Splat! PU!

My title describes the sound of the Koch Bros. colostomy bag dropping out. I do not know whether to laugh or lament the fact that the Democratic Presidential Candidate will not have Scott Walker to run against. His dismal record as the Governor of Wisconsin would have made him a weak opponent in the general election. I hate to say that Wisconsin deserves him, but that is what happens when people are too lazy to vote in mid-term elections!

I wrote the preceding paragraph before Walker made his announcement. Technically he is suspending his campaign; which is a bit like a marathon runner stopping after the first four miles to rest his legs. He also said other candidates running against Trump should drop out so the best candidate can take the nomination from Trump? And who should stay in? Walker did not say. I guess he still wants to keep his stink in the national game by teasing the pundits into conjecturing about who he might endorse. That is about as close as he can come to being relevant on the national stage!

Gagging!

Last night I prepared for the Republican debates by turning off the television and eating a very early dinner. The expected food fight at the kiddie table would have been bad for my digestion, and if I had tried to eat anything while watching the so called adults at their table I would have probably thrown food at my television!

Thanks to CNN's moderator, Jack Tapper, the first part of the “debate” at the adults table was a food fight of sorts. I suppose there was some justice in CNN's approach. I mean it did give candidates a very public stage on which to reply to Trump's insults, and it gave Trump the same stage to address the criticisms leveled at him. The only winners in that regard, however, were the candidates who refused to answer the Jerry Springeresque questions. I say that because in spite of the praise Ronald Reagan received for his broken record recitations of “[t]here he goes again,” even a fairly large number of Republicans eventually tire of “I know you are but what am I” arguments!

Okay, I have to admit it. Some of the bickering was good theater. I was amused by Carly Fiorina's lame attempts to explain laying off 30,000 workers at Hewlett Packard and her explanation for why she was forced to resign from her position as CEO of HP. Trumps attempts to defend his four bankruptcies were less amusing because he has said it all before, during the first debate. 

Speaking of Carly Fiorina, I have to say the pundits are doing it again; they are lauding her performance. I suppose if you are a factually challenged Republican you might be impressed with her. For the rest of us she merely confirmed the image we Californians formed of her as a vicious, privileged, Ayn Rand liar who does not care about anything but her self. The vicious lies she told about Planned Parenthood during this debate were beyond the pale even for the paranoid ignoramuses she is trying to exploit! But the religio-ramuses will still buy Carly's lies, and the ignoramus, Mike Huckabee, will still be there to reinforce those lies!

The rest of the Republican field is not much better. The only candidates who did not seem to be competing for the title of Jingoistic idiot of the night were Dr. Rand Paul and John Kasich; although I do have to add the caveat that the good doctor's misdiagnoses makes him mistakenly opposed to the treaty with Iran.  I suppose that is to be expected.  If he is to remain in the party of no to government, science and reason he has to oppose everything Obama does.  Unlike John Kasich or Lindsey Graham, Rand Paul is more concerned about winning the primary than he is about winning the general election.  I might add here that Ben Carson's performance inspired yawns, while Jeb Bush's spirited defense of his brother's failed foreign policy inspired laughter. Yeah Jeb - run on that; I dare you!  The rest of the candidates were a bit like the backdrop -  they were noticeably there but not very memorable.

The one thing all the Republican Candidates have in common is this absurd proclivity for pissing off women and Hispanics. Yes I know Jeb and some of the others have nice words for women and Hispanics, but the policies those candidates offer are still far too harmful and offensive to appeal to the majority of women or the majority of Hispanics.

Fortunately the gagging induced by Republican duplicity and absurdity has subsided now. I have my voice back, and you will hear from me again soon.

Robert Borosage On The Bern

I am sure it will not come as any surprise to my readers that I am miffed at the lazy slugs of the lame stream media who insist on comparing Bernie Sanders to Donald Trump. People who respond favorably to the bellicose Trump- eting of the faux elephant- have only this vague notion that they should be fighting mad at something or someone; they are not bright enough to figure out what or who they should be fighting or why! They (Trump's followers) have always been so anti government that embracing the truculent braggadocio of a demagogue like Trump is the norm for them rather than the exception. Bernie Sanders' followers, on the other hand, have New Dealer expectations; they are actually demanding a government that will work for them again.

Rather than trying to explain the appeal of two candidates that are not comparable, Robert Borosage wisely avoids Trump/Sanders comparisons and likens Bernie Sanders' appeal to that of Britain's Jeremy Corbyn. Mr Borosage's article in Campaign For America's Future is entitled “Sanders and Corbyn: There Is An Alternative.” And “There Is An Alternative” is a refutation of Margaret Thatcher's statement that “there is no alternative” to the conservative agenda.

“Beneath the Corbyn victory and the Sanders surge is a revolt against politics as usual. What the chattering gaggles of 'political strategists' find it difficult to absorb is how much people are fed up with an establishment politics that has utterly failed them,” Mr. Borosage wrote.

What particularly seems to have alluded the pundits and political strategists is the fact that a very large segment of the public has figured out that the results of the policies Tony Blair, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush followed, as they echoed Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Regan heralding an “end of the big government era,” were devastating. As Mr. Borosage wrote:

There were “[f]inancial bubbles followed by financial collapse. Gilded Age inequality and a declining middle class. Mass incarceration. Public squalor. Unending trade deficits that savaged American manufacturing and American workers. Millions in America surviving on less than two dollars a day. And, the final insult, a “recovery” – strangled by a bipartisan embrace of austerity – that saved the banks and served the few, while most Americans struggle with stagnant wages and less security. People are increasingly convinced that the rules are rigged against them.”

Jeremy Corbyn and Bernie Sanders offer an alternative to economic policies that should have crashed with the economy and George W. Bush in 2008 but continue to impoverish the middle class to this day! Both Mr. Corbyn and Mr. Sanders have built up a large and growing following, but Mr. Borosage has a sage warning about expectations:

“Corbyn will have a hard time reviving a badly divided and demoralized Labour Party. Sanders remains a long shot in the Democratic primaries. But one thing is already clear: The center will not hold. The old consensus is collapsing in the wake of its failures. People are casting about for a new course.”

Pardon me while I scream: WE'VE WAITED TOO DAMN LONG ALREADY! FEEL THE BERN!

Daddy's GOP

Yesterday I was searching the inter net for a long forgotten quote that went something like this: when honest people abandon politics and government the dishonest people rule. I am still a bit frustrated because I could not find what I thought was a famous quote. But a new topic sprang to mind when my search turned up this quotation of President Eisenhower:

“Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history.” wikiquote

Oh sweet reason and light! I cannot say that both of my parents were Republicans but they sure liked Ike, and with good reason. As David Oshinsky wrote:

“Eisenhower was known as a harmonizer, a man who could get diverse factions to work toward a common goal... Leadership, he explained, meant patienceand conciliation, not "hitting people over the head." – David M. Oshinsky, in A Conspiracy So Immense : The World of Joe McCarthy‎, (2005), p. 259

It is really tempting to compare what passes for leadership in the Republican Party today with the leadership provided by President Eisenhower, and to despair over how far into the paranoid – right wing – obyss that once great party has fallen.

Hark! I hear a huckster spouting campaign rhetoric that sounds like it was written by someone in the WWE, and he is the leading aspirant seeking to become the GOP's Presidential candidate. Also vying for the Republican nomination is candidate Huckabee who wants to discard Marbury v. Madison, two hundred years of judicial review, and the part of our constitution that provides for the separation of church and state. For those of you who prefer more traditional corporate lackeys we have candidate Jeb Bush. Jeb wants to re-institute the failed policies of his brother, George, who gave us at least one ill-advised war, crashed our economy, and ignored Eisenhower's warning by trying to destroy social security! But, as the pitchmen would say, wait! That's not all! There are sixteen people seeking the Republican nomination. And none of them have the courage to stand up to the mindless and vicious Republican reactionaries who now control congress. Those congressional reactionaries are constantly attacking unemployment insurance, labor laws, farm programs, the graduated income tax, and every other piece of progressive legislation passed during and since the Great Depression. They have gone so far as to threaten to make us default on our debts and have shut down the government in an effort to extort a repeal of the sort of progressive programs the people of this nation favor. Having failed in those efforts has not deterred them. They are threatening once more to shut down the government in order to defund Planned Parenthood, which is an organization so many people depend on for health care.

The problem with trying to compare Eisenhower Republicans with the Republicans of today is the dichotomy that existed in the Republican Party during the Eisenhower years. From 1952 to 1954 Senator McCarthy was so influential that even Eisenhower was afraid to oppose McCarthy's rein of terror. It was the Army - McCarthy hearings of 1954 that finally changed that! After the fall of McCarthy liking Ike and voting for Republicans became a reasonable thing to do. As I said in a March 4, 2009 post entitled “Obama v. The Dixiecans,” President Eisenhower saved the Republican Party by pulling it, kicking and screaming, to the political center. The problem is that this victory over the lunatic right was not complete. Like the Herpes Zoster virus that causes chicken pox and shingles, right wing paranoia and stupidity can never be purged from the body politic. And there are always Republican demagogues who are eager to stir up the fear and loathing that allows those right wing lunatics to re-emerge. This was true even during Eisenhower's time and in spite of his best efforts to arrest the influence of those demagogues!

Trying to rest control of the Republican Party from the lunatic right is not going to be an easy thing to do. The first thing it is going to take is for the American voters to wake up and kick the Republicans so hard they will be wearing their butt cheeks as ear muffs. Hopefully, it will not take another great depression to motivate the voters to deliver such a kick and to keep kicking during off year elections as well as during Presidential elections. If that happens the brighter Republicans will look for a leader who is capable of convincing the mentally challenged that the reason they cannot get anywhere is because they cannot walk with their butt cheeks hugging their ears and that the ass kicking causing that will not stop until they become reasonable.

I hope that happens soon. 2016 would be a good time to deliver the first kick. I am really looking forward to pointing a champagne cork at the unenlightened dullards as I celebrate a major Party's return to sanity! It would be so nice to have a functioning government that can get some meaningful legislation passed and reasonable agreements and treaties approved? Those are things we used to be able to take for granted!