We all know that Scott Murphy is now the “decisive” winner of CD 20’s recent special election but we still have no idea who he is. I suspect we are about to find out.
Now, I’m no fan of Jim Tedisco. In fact, if I voted for evil of any kind (lesser or otherwise), Murphy might well have had my vote this time around. But, as I always do, I wrote in an independent. I’ve learned that it really doesn’t matter which two corporate felons the machine tells me I have to choose between. I don’t have to do what they tell me to. I am free. They’re not the boss of me. Either felon they want me to pick will inevitably do the same damage while they’re in office (which makes total sense if you stop to look at which lobby groups each candidate is indentured to).
After the Democrats in Pennsylvania hired Ken Starr’s old law firm to sue my fellow Green, Carl Romanelli, I swore that I would never again even consider voting for a corporate party candidate (never mind secretly hope that one would win seeing them as the “lesser evil”). I really don’t care anymore. Carl’s crime was that he had the testicular fortitude to run for a seat in the U.S. Senate. For that, the Democrats tried to totally destroy the man.
If you have ever met Carl and understand just what a wonderful and good soul he is, you would share my ire. The Pennsylvania Dems used House employees on the taxpayer dole to tamper with Carl’s campaign. Then, they sued him for legal fees because they brought him into court to have his signatures wiped out! Some of them have now been charged and convicted but not before they got a successful judgment against him for the legal fees … $80,000! Even with three Democrats in jail, this fight is still going on.
I will never look at the Democrats as the “lesser” evil party again. They’re evil “identical twins” from here on in and that’s that.
I made a lot of people angry telling them that Obama would just be another Gee Dubya (with, of course, an enhanced ability to speak and relate to others). I was right … the killing has become much more civilized! Obama’s use of predator drones, his many lies about ending torture and rendition and shutting down Gitmo, the acceleration of our two most obvious wars, his seeming inability to sputter the words “single-payer” even once (never mind in a complete sentence) … all this would seem to confirm my diagnosis.
You vote two-party. You get the same result. Every time. Period. This congressional election may be an excellent learning opportunity for those Democrats open to the idea that their behavior is the textbook definition of insanity (”doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result”).
Murphy was “chosen” through an arduous selection process. I imagine the county chairs lined everybody up and said, “All right, youse mugs! How much ya got?” They then picked the guy who had lots of it. I have lived in Glens Falls for about ten years and I was born in Saratoga. While I love Glens Falls, I don’t consider myself a “local”. I wasn’t raised here. No one who grew up here would consider me a local, either. I’m, more correctly, a transplant.
Murphy is not a “local” businessman. He is from Missouri and Manhattan and India. Now, I hate to say “carpetbagger”, but if the shoe fits ...
The old farmer was asked by the city slicker, “My daughter just had a baby. Is my new grandson finally a ‘local’?” Without missing a beat, the farmer replied, “Boy, if a dog gives birth to puppies in an oven, do you call ‘em ‘biscuits’?”
Murphy is not a local. As such, will he understand our CD’s needs? Does he even care to? He is also not a transplant who has embraced the community. He has not been involved enough in it for anyone to even know who he is (never mind what he thinks about the issues).
I have conversed with many of my friends and neighbors about this. Most of them have never even heard of Murphy outside of his TV commercials. Murphy claims to be local and no one’s even heard of him? I’m sure there are plenty of people in our town who don’t care for my politics (or don’t care for what they think my politics are) but we all get along pretty well, nonetheless, and that’s one of the reasons I love Glens Falls so much. That’s why when Murphy decided to run and no one knew who he was, my ’spider sense’ started tingling. We ALL know each other here. I was genuinely surprised that such a wealthy businessman could fly so low under the radar.
The local power structure seemed pretty happy to have “one of their own” running but they also seemed absolutely clueless about where he had suddenly come from. Does this mean “outside agenda”? Probably.
Murphy married into one of the most powerful Republican families in the area, the Hogans (these are State Senator Betty Little’s people). I can imagine that Little was pretty upset that the Republicans didn’t choose her to run in CD 20. If they had wanted to win, they certainly would have chosen her instead of Coach Jimmy. Does this mean that Murphy’s a D.I.N.O. (Democrat In Name Only) prompted to run by the same business interests Betty Little supports? Probably.
The local progressive Democrats were angry and felt betrayed when Murphy was chosen. Their committee chairs chose Scott for them, then he proceeded to avoid them all studiously. Many refused to go door to door for him, but he had more than enough money from his various jimmy“businesses” to run without their help. They all knew it and, more importantly, they all knew that not one of them had the chutzpah to cross the line and vote for a … gasp! … Republican, especially the hated Tedisco.
Murphy didn’t need to reach out to his own flock at all. the little (d) after his name means 1/3 of the vote, no matter what. It is a guarantee up here. You just need to work on the other 1/6th. Apparently, Murphy was aware of this.
He announced his intent to join the pro-war Blue Dogs almost right off the bat. Talk about spitting in their collective progressive face but, as I said, Murphy knew they would vote Democrat no matter what he did and no matter how much they disagreed with his basic positions. They will simply refuse to vote for an independent or a Republican who agrees with them on their issues, no matter what. Blind loyalty.
I asked a local organizer who he thought this Murphy guy was. He said, “We have no idea. He basically bought the candidacy. He’s never voted here. He’s never given money to any Democrat group or candidate. We’re totally in the dark.”
I asked if the fact that Murphy was being backed by Mark Behan and John Davidson bothered the Dems at all. Behan Communications serves as a mouthpiece for GE and local Republicans like Betty Little and Kate Hogan. Davidson is a VP at Jointa-Galusha, a cement company owned by DA Collins, a major contractor much involved in the AMD fiasco.
He was unaware on both counts. Could the Dems really be this excited about having put one more person in office whose basic aim is to funnel more pork into his buddies’ coffers? I guess they are all answering this question as we speak running around all excited about their “win”.
I have a simple question for you.
Aside from bringing home the bacon, all congress people need to vote on important national issues that are, likely, more broad-reaching than their acts of petty larceny at home.
Murphy is pro-war, pro-corporation in economic matters and anti-single payer health care.
Jimmy is pro-war, pro-corporation in economic matters and anti-single payer health care.
On the three issues a majority of Americans see as the most important of the day, these guys are in perfect lockstep with each other and with the corporate agenda.
So, why did it matter which of these “evils” was the victor? Please let me know why you’re happy about this. Who actually sees these guys as different and why?
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Monday, April 20, 2009
$5,000 Bullets?
I love Chris Rock. He does a great piece on gun control. He says that we should not be worried about it, that we should instead seriously consider “bullet control”. He says if bullets cost 5,000 dollars apiece, we would never again hear the words “innocent bystander”. He goes on to say that if someone got shot and bullets were that expensive, they “must have done something!” You gotta chuckle. He has a gift.
That said, its awfully hard to laugh about gun control in the wake of the shootings in Binghamton. A lone gunman, alienated, upset and laid off, took out his frustrations on innocent people at the American Civic Association, killing 13 of them before turning his weapon on himself. How many times are we going to hear terrible, heart-wrenching stories like this before it ends? This seemingly random, angry, slaughter scares us all. While we empathize with the victims and their families, I think it is the fear that this could happen to us or a loved one that makes us feel we must do something to prevent it ever happening again.
I think a few things should be fairly obvious to us all. Someone who decides to kill people at random (especially people he doesn’t even know) must be severely ill. This was a disturbed and isolated individual, not someone who, by any stretch of the imagination could be considered a stable or responsible gun owner. Most of us are (stable and responsible). While most people I know have gone through trying times and jokingly contemplated destructive behavior on one level or other, it is our very ability to reason our way past these frustrations, without acting out in a homicidal way, that renders us civilized or stable.
Those without any direct knowledge of guns often scream loudly for tighter gun control anytime a shooting like this occurs. At first this seems like a reasonable reaction but after a while all I can think about incidents like Binghamton is what would have happened if there had been a licensed gun owner with a carry permit in the midst of all this?
It would be far better if unstable people had access to no weaponry or that we could somehow restrict them to less lethal weapons (knives, baseball bats, karate lessons). The problem is that, most shooters, this guy included, are highly unlikely to get their guns legally. That means, regardless of legislation, we are likely to see more of these mass shootings in the future and that the underlying reasons for the shooting have little or nothing to do with gun legislation.
There were 3,000 people who did not survive the fall of the three towers on 9/11 and based on those deaths shouldn’t we be freaking out about box cutters and legislating against those? Outside of the machinery of war, box cutters have, statistically, killed more Americans at one time than any other implement in this past century. Please know that I do not invoke the memory of the victims of 9/11 casually but I have to wonder if any of those people would see gun control as a logical and relevant response to the largest mass murder in American history? We have very tight rules about the use of airplanes and thermite and that didn’t stop those who did it. Not in the least.
I have to ask those who are freaking out what logical good it would do to register all our guns? It seems that this is what the public is screaming for in the wake of Binghamton but registration is, historically, just the first act of a government wishing to end private gun ownership. It is also how the Nazis eliminated those who might have opposed them before they could properly organize. In a country in which the government has killed many innocents (Waco, Ruby Ridge, Amadou Diallo), letting only the government have arms seems pretty foolhardy to me. I think that our government frequently kills people who have broken no laws and who do not deserve to die. How can we protect ourselves if they legislate away our right to bear arms?
People all over the country use guns to put food on their families’ tables and our government has spent the better part of a century clamping down on and restricting and licensing our right to do that. For those of us who eat meat, hunting is a far healthier and humane way of feeding our families’ than buying meat from feedlots and factory farms.
So, what should we do about gun violence?
Well, contrary to my own, rather peaceful, individual behavior, I might suggest that we allow our citizens to be armed as our Constitution states they have a right to be. I have two friends who have carry permits and who use them and I promise you that if either of them were at that center, I know the news headline would have been markedly different. They are well-trained, responsible, serious marksmen and the gunman may have gotten a few shots off first but, trust me, he would have been down and out long before he killed 13 people!
I can understand the hue and cry from those who are shocked by this type of violence. We all are. But please don’t use it as an excuse to allow the government and other criminals to become the only armed entities. That is a serious mistake. We need guns to hunt. We need them for self defense. We need them to protect against tyranny. They are a part of our country’s history and its future. They’re not going anywhere.
I am pretty sure that registering legal guns is highly unlikely to stop a single instance of violence. While limiting gun ownership and registering legal guns may not be the end of our right to bear arms, many of us see it as the top of a very slippery slope.
If ever I was in a place where someone was running amok with a gun or a knife or a box cutter, I would want to be able to protect my children or myself or others. I’m a big guy and I don’t scare easy but we all know that the odds are likely to favor the guy wielding a gun. Put yourself in the shoes of those who just died in Binghamton. Without a gun to protect themselves, the victims were all at the mercy of someone who was obviously desperate, ill and violent. They were sitting ducks. Without a gun, they had no choice but to wait and pray that there wouldn’t be a bullet for them. If someone there had a gun, I am positive that many more of them would have survived. Isn’t it really just that simple?
That said, its awfully hard to laugh about gun control in the wake of the shootings in Binghamton. A lone gunman, alienated, upset and laid off, took out his frustrations on innocent people at the American Civic Association, killing 13 of them before turning his weapon on himself. How many times are we going to hear terrible, heart-wrenching stories like this before it ends? This seemingly random, angry, slaughter scares us all. While we empathize with the victims and their families, I think it is the fear that this could happen to us or a loved one that makes us feel we must do something to prevent it ever happening again.
I think a few things should be fairly obvious to us all. Someone who decides to kill people at random (especially people he doesn’t even know) must be severely ill. This was a disturbed and isolated individual, not someone who, by any stretch of the imagination could be considered a stable or responsible gun owner. Most of us are (stable and responsible). While most people I know have gone through trying times and jokingly contemplated destructive behavior on one level or other, it is our very ability to reason our way past these frustrations, without acting out in a homicidal way, that renders us civilized or stable.
Those without any direct knowledge of guns often scream loudly for tighter gun control anytime a shooting like this occurs. At first this seems like a reasonable reaction but after a while all I can think about incidents like Binghamton is what would have happened if there had been a licensed gun owner with a carry permit in the midst of all this?
It would be far better if unstable people had access to no weaponry or that we could somehow restrict them to less lethal weapons (knives, baseball bats, karate lessons). The problem is that, most shooters, this guy included, are highly unlikely to get their guns legally. That means, regardless of legislation, we are likely to see more of these mass shootings in the future and that the underlying reasons for the shooting have little or nothing to do with gun legislation.
There were 3,000 people who did not survive the fall of the three towers on 9/11 and based on those deaths shouldn’t we be freaking out about box cutters and legislating against those? Outside of the machinery of war, box cutters have, statistically, killed more Americans at one time than any other implement in this past century. Please know that I do not invoke the memory of the victims of 9/11 casually but I have to wonder if any of those people would see gun control as a logical and relevant response to the largest mass murder in American history? We have very tight rules about the use of airplanes and thermite and that didn’t stop those who did it. Not in the least.
I have to ask those who are freaking out what logical good it would do to register all our guns? It seems that this is what the public is screaming for in the wake of Binghamton but registration is, historically, just the first act of a government wishing to end private gun ownership. It is also how the Nazis eliminated those who might have opposed them before they could properly organize. In a country in which the government has killed many innocents (Waco, Ruby Ridge, Amadou Diallo), letting only the government have arms seems pretty foolhardy to me. I think that our government frequently kills people who have broken no laws and who do not deserve to die. How can we protect ourselves if they legislate away our right to bear arms?
People all over the country use guns to put food on their families’ tables and our government has spent the better part of a century clamping down on and restricting and licensing our right to do that. For those of us who eat meat, hunting is a far healthier and humane way of feeding our families’ than buying meat from feedlots and factory farms.
So, what should we do about gun violence?
Well, contrary to my own, rather peaceful, individual behavior, I might suggest that we allow our citizens to be armed as our Constitution states they have a right to be. I have two friends who have carry permits and who use them and I promise you that if either of them were at that center, I know the news headline would have been markedly different. They are well-trained, responsible, serious marksmen and the gunman may have gotten a few shots off first but, trust me, he would have been down and out long before he killed 13 people!
I can understand the hue and cry from those who are shocked by this type of violence. We all are. But please don’t use it as an excuse to allow the government and other criminals to become the only armed entities. That is a serious mistake. We need guns to hunt. We need them for self defense. We need them to protect against tyranny. They are a part of our country’s history and its future. They’re not going anywhere.
I am pretty sure that registering legal guns is highly unlikely to stop a single instance of violence. While limiting gun ownership and registering legal guns may not be the end of our right to bear arms, many of us see it as the top of a very slippery slope.
If ever I was in a place where someone was running amok with a gun or a knife or a box cutter, I would want to be able to protect my children or myself or others. I’m a big guy and I don’t scare easy but we all know that the odds are likely to favor the guy wielding a gun. Put yourself in the shoes of those who just died in Binghamton. Without a gun to protect themselves, the victims were all at the mercy of someone who was obviously desperate, ill and violent. They were sitting ducks. Without a gun, they had no choice but to wait and pray that there wouldn’t be a bullet for them. If someone there had a gun, I am positive that many more of them would have survived. Isn’t it really just that simple?
Friday, April 17, 2009
George Washington Would Have Been At The Cannabis Rally
“Make the most you can of the Indian hemp seed. Sow it everywhere."
- George Washington -
“If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.”
- Thomas Jefferson -
It is well-known (within my circles, anyway) that Washington and Jefferson were both promoters of hemp and its many uses. They both articulated an excellent case for this “weed” because they saw it as a way to create some agrarian self-sufficiency for our fledgling republic. Specifically, from what I have read on the subject, they saw it as a way to reduce our dependence on foreign goods and trade.
Back then, hemp was widely used by small farmers as a food and as a natural fiber with which one could make cloth, rope and paper. The oil from its seed could be used to fuel lamps or a torch. Its slightly different cousin, Marijuana, could also be used to aid those in pain (not to mention providing one with a ’sunnier’ disposition). Hemp and pot, today, are no less useful with the noted exception that, growing either will get you sent to prison. How is it we got to this point? How did we go from our founding fathers expounding the virtues of this miraculous ‘weed’ to a puritanical society in which it growers are jailed?
If you do not know about how slavery and industrial agriculture and Dupont (and many other various and sundry catalysts) lead to hemp and marijuana prohibition, I would humbly suggest that you have some reading to do. Suffice it to say that most reasonably informed individuals can agree that the real reasons for this prohibition had very little to do with marijuana usage and any negative impact said usage may have had upon society.
There are lots of marijuana reform advocates who feel compelled to isolate discussion of these multiple issues to “medical marijuana” instead of speaking about the broader subjects of marijuana and hemp reform. While they are all inter-twined, it does hemp a great disservice to let the medical marijuana issue speak for it. While all prohibitions on these plants are immensely unjust, they are not all the same issue. As such, I’m not going to speak about medical marijuana. If Ed Dague and his brave and frank public discussion of pain and relief have not melted our regional resolve where this cruel prohibition is concerned, I really can’t imagine what else might.
I think that the quotes from the two iconic figures from American history that began this piece sum it all up quite nicely. Hemp (and pot) being illegal is an anti-farmer, anti-citizen issue and Jefferson and Washington knew that so lets keep it that simple as well. They were pretty smart guys, right?
Instead of “medical marijuana”, lets instead openly discuss the more prevalent use for marijuana. About 70% of Americans have admitted to engaging, at least once, in the smoking of marijuana to … get high … as a way to relax or just for kicks. Most of us have smoked pot. As a thinking individual who has performed this heinous act many different times in my life, I know from personal experience that it is far less harmful than alcohol or tobacco can be (and, arguably, far more amusing, as well). But, the government has made me so paranoid about occasionally blowing off steam in this manner, that I long ago switched over to working out or having a few glasses of wine or beer, instead.
Over 16,000 people are killed every year in the United States in alcohol-related vehicular accidents. Add this to the massive number of people who die every year from alcohol and tobacco use (85,000 and 435,000) and we’re looking at a death toll of over 536,000 people in the U.S. alone from alcohol and tobacco. How many people does pot kill?
Well, this evil, terrible, ‘gateway drug’ featured so honestly in classic films like ‘Reefer Madness’ has resulted in not one single documented case of death … ever, in the history of the universe. That’s the actual number … ZERO. Think about that for a second … 536,000 per year versus Zero.
Now, if you explain this to the average third grader … Substances A and B kill 536,000 people every year and Substance C kills no one. Then you ask them which substance should people be put in jail for using, what do you think they would say? Why is society’s answer to this question any different? Why do we prohibit the use of the substance with the zero death rate and legitimize and tax and regulate and encourage to use of the substances that kill so many of us? Are we complete and total idiots?
To put it simply, those who know these truths understand that pot and hemp must be illegal for reasons other than the propaganda calling pot a ‘gateway drug’ or a ‘dangerous substance’ because it is truly neither. The first reason is that big cotton growers did not want to see a developing crop that was easier to pick than theirs (hemp could be easily harvested with a machine while cotton needed to be picked by hand). Secondly, blacks and Mexicans were the primary users of Marijuana when it was criminalized which helped to provide a steady flow of inmates during the advent of our racist industrial prison system. Third, Dupont didn’t want its newly-emerging, petrol-based, technology (plastic) to have to compete with a better, cheaper, cleaner, natural product that could be used in almost every application with as good or better results. Lastly, the CIA needs a way to fund its illegal and covert operations.
So we deny ourselves access to a natural product that truly could be ours. A product that can be grown domestically and made into composites harder and lighter than most carbon fiber resins. We deny ourselves a clean fuel source that can be burned in any diesel engine. We prevent the growth of a cash crop that can be eaten at our breakfast tables and worn on our backs. We say no to rejuvenating small family farms in America by allowing them to grow a crop that is 100% usable and that will flourish pretty much anywhere and with far less impact than wheat, corn and most other subsidized commodity crops. Why? Because our government does not do things that benefit us unless we force it to do so.
Today (Friday April 17th) on the East Capital Lawn in Albany, from 2pm to 6pm, there will be a “Rally To Restore Your Rights Ending Cannabis Prohibition”. Its organizers say there will be live bands, activist speakers and hemp products for sale. We should all be there.
I know that if George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were around today, not only would they be speaking at the rally, they probably would have been the ones to call me and ask if I would be attending, in place of the current organizers, N.Y.C.A.M.P. (New York Citizens Against Marijuana Prohibition).
Would George and Tom have been heading over to the Dead show at the Times Union Center afterwards? Of that, I can’t be certain.
- George Washington -
“If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.”
- Thomas Jefferson -
It is well-known (within my circles, anyway) that Washington and Jefferson were both promoters of hemp and its many uses. They both articulated an excellent case for this “weed” because they saw it as a way to create some agrarian self-sufficiency for our fledgling republic. Specifically, from what I have read on the subject, they saw it as a way to reduce our dependence on foreign goods and trade.
Back then, hemp was widely used by small farmers as a food and as a natural fiber with which one could make cloth, rope and paper. The oil from its seed could be used to fuel lamps or a torch. Its slightly different cousin, Marijuana, could also be used to aid those in pain (not to mention providing one with a ’sunnier’ disposition). Hemp and pot, today, are no less useful with the noted exception that, growing either will get you sent to prison. How is it we got to this point? How did we go from our founding fathers expounding the virtues of this miraculous ‘weed’ to a puritanical society in which it growers are jailed?
If you do not know about how slavery and industrial agriculture and Dupont (and many other various and sundry catalysts) lead to hemp and marijuana prohibition, I would humbly suggest that you have some reading to do. Suffice it to say that most reasonably informed individuals can agree that the real reasons for this prohibition had very little to do with marijuana usage and any negative impact said usage may have had upon society.
There are lots of marijuana reform advocates who feel compelled to isolate discussion of these multiple issues to “medical marijuana” instead of speaking about the broader subjects of marijuana and hemp reform. While they are all inter-twined, it does hemp a great disservice to let the medical marijuana issue speak for it. While all prohibitions on these plants are immensely unjust, they are not all the same issue. As such, I’m not going to speak about medical marijuana. If Ed Dague and his brave and frank public discussion of pain and relief have not melted our regional resolve where this cruel prohibition is concerned, I really can’t imagine what else might.
I think that the quotes from the two iconic figures from American history that began this piece sum it all up quite nicely. Hemp (and pot) being illegal is an anti-farmer, anti-citizen issue and Jefferson and Washington knew that so lets keep it that simple as well. They were pretty smart guys, right?
Instead of “medical marijuana”, lets instead openly discuss the more prevalent use for marijuana. About 70% of Americans have admitted to engaging, at least once, in the smoking of marijuana to … get high … as a way to relax or just for kicks. Most of us have smoked pot. As a thinking individual who has performed this heinous act many different times in my life, I know from personal experience that it is far less harmful than alcohol or tobacco can be (and, arguably, far more amusing, as well). But, the government has made me so paranoid about occasionally blowing off steam in this manner, that I long ago switched over to working out or having a few glasses of wine or beer, instead.
Over 16,000 people are killed every year in the United States in alcohol-related vehicular accidents. Add this to the massive number of people who die every year from alcohol and tobacco use (85,000 and 435,000) and we’re looking at a death toll of over 536,000 people in the U.S. alone from alcohol and tobacco. How many people does pot kill?
Well, this evil, terrible, ‘gateway drug’ featured so honestly in classic films like ‘Reefer Madness’ has resulted in not one single documented case of death … ever, in the history of the universe. That’s the actual number … ZERO. Think about that for a second … 536,000 per year versus Zero.
Now, if you explain this to the average third grader … Substances A and B kill 536,000 people every year and Substance C kills no one. Then you ask them which substance should people be put in jail for using, what do you think they would say? Why is society’s answer to this question any different? Why do we prohibit the use of the substance with the zero death rate and legitimize and tax and regulate and encourage to use of the substances that kill so many of us? Are we complete and total idiots?
To put it simply, those who know these truths understand that pot and hemp must be illegal for reasons other than the propaganda calling pot a ‘gateway drug’ or a ‘dangerous substance’ because it is truly neither. The first reason is that big cotton growers did not want to see a developing crop that was easier to pick than theirs (hemp could be easily harvested with a machine while cotton needed to be picked by hand). Secondly, blacks and Mexicans were the primary users of Marijuana when it was criminalized which helped to provide a steady flow of inmates during the advent of our racist industrial prison system. Third, Dupont didn’t want its newly-emerging, petrol-based, technology (plastic) to have to compete with a better, cheaper, cleaner, natural product that could be used in almost every application with as good or better results. Lastly, the CIA needs a way to fund its illegal and covert operations.
So we deny ourselves access to a natural product that truly could be ours. A product that can be grown domestically and made into composites harder and lighter than most carbon fiber resins. We deny ourselves a clean fuel source that can be burned in any diesel engine. We prevent the growth of a cash crop that can be eaten at our breakfast tables and worn on our backs. We say no to rejuvenating small family farms in America by allowing them to grow a crop that is 100% usable and that will flourish pretty much anywhere and with far less impact than wheat, corn and most other subsidized commodity crops. Why? Because our government does not do things that benefit us unless we force it to do so.
Today (Friday April 17th) on the East Capital Lawn in Albany, from 2pm to 6pm, there will be a “Rally To Restore Your Rights Ending Cannabis Prohibition”. Its organizers say there will be live bands, activist speakers and hemp products for sale. We should all be there.
I know that if George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were around today, not only would they be speaking at the rally, they probably would have been the ones to call me and ask if I would be attending, in place of the current organizers, N.Y.C.A.M.P. (New York Citizens Against Marijuana Prohibition).
Would George and Tom have been heading over to the Dead show at the Times Union Center afterwards? Of that, I can’t be certain.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
The New Tea(bag) Party
Today, many lunatics from the Sean Hannity, Glen Beck and Fox TV camps will be protesting our “tax and spend” federal government at various public places around the country. They will do this by bringing tea (bags) to the steps of post offices, City Halls and legislatures and other governmental buildings and by mailing tea bags to their elected officials. These crazy people will be lured by various extremist ideologies, including the wacky Libertarian belief that it is unconstitutional for the federal government to collect a tax on wages.
I spent a large part of my day yesterday listening to disparaging comments directed at these “tea-partiers” by many in the media, some made by my own friends and political compatriots. Many right wing pundits have latched onto this protest idea as if it is their own and many on the perceived left now see this action as a brazen, corporate attack on their shiny new president. With a Democrat now firmly ensconced in office, its easy for them to imagine that all of the people who will be involved today are Republicans or right-wingers or racists.
Well, I’ll be one of those “lunatics” and I am not a Republican, a right-winger or a racist. I know many others who will be out there as well who are not so easily or accurately defined by these labels. In fact, the organizer of our local protest is a Vietnam veteran who has been fairly active in the peace movement for years. He does not belong to either major political party (he dismisses them both as “War, Inc.”).
While he may not share many of my more progressive views, he is a good and respectful man and he is also a successful tax resistor. It is pretty clear to me that he is not lead by people like Beck or Hannity (or by anyone else, for that matter). He seems to be a pretty well-read guy who figures things out for himself.
To me, this situation is similar to how all the peace vigils suddenly ended once Obama was elected. Why did this happen? The wars certainly aren’t over! Guantanamo certainly isn’t closed. There are currently more mercenaries in Iraq than at any point previous. Extraordinary rendition has continued. Why then, don’t the peace vigils continue? Were they really just anti-Bush vigils?
Many would level this accusation at the whole anti-war movement. They would say that we were just working with moveon.org to protest Bush in order to get a Democrat elected. Well, I was definitely not out there for those reasons. I was out there to protest a war for resource that we didn’t need to be involved in. The lack of a substantial peace movement today makes me scratch the old noggin, though. Were the right-wing pundits correct about the bulk of us?
I have finally realized that many in the Peace movement really do only object to war when it is clear that the war in question is a Republican war. But the criticism concerning ulterior motive was regularly leveled at all of us by conservative pundits and this is unfair. Many people did only fill the streets because moveon.org told them to but it is of vital importance to know that there were also many of us who were not there merely to support corporate machine politics.
While there is no doubt that some among us may have been wearing Democratic Party T-shirts under their anti-war uniforms and while they may have put those uniforms up on that shelf in the back of their closet (at least until the next “changing of the guard”), these people are not the whole peace movement. Not by a long stretch.
In my world, being an advocate for peace is still absolutely necessary, especially now that the Democrats are running the show. When a “bad” war falls under the jurisdiction of the Democratic Party, it doesn’t, all of a sudden, become a “good”war. The death toll (of both American soldiers and Middle Eastern civilians) doesn’t suddenly become a necessary and incremental step towards the peace. It is still a terrible waste of human life perpetrated by resource-hungry corporations and our military industrial complex. It still needs to be opposed!
During the Bush regime, many in the right-wing media excoriated anyone who was seen as supporting moveon.org or UFPJ or Code Pink, all of whom were involved in organizing protests and vigils. I never went to a single protest or rally coerced to do so by any of these groups (though one or more of them may have had their hand in the planning or promotion). To paint me as a Democrat and a follower just because I was there, rather than a principled peace advocate, is entirely unfair.
Now that the fake corporate party shoe is on the other fake corporate-party foot, I feel it is equally incorrect to say that everyone out there today opposing the collection and expenditure of taxes by our federal government is automatically being lead by right wing pundits and the Republican Party. Not correct! Some may well be there for these reasons, but not all of us. Don’t forget that. I will be at a tax protest today for several reasons …
1) I am no lawyer but I believe that it is unconstitutional to collect taxes on wages. Prior to interpretation by the courts, this actually seems pretty obvious and is stated quite clearly in our founding documents.
2) Based on what I have read, it does seem that the 16th amendment (the one allowing the eventual birth of the federal income tax) was never properly ratified. The court that finally claimed it to be properly ratified was stating this in relation to its use in collecting income made by sale of property and not income derived from a person’s labor.
3) I can’t think of too many things I like that the federal government (run by either major party) has done with my tax money in pretty much all of my adult years and I am very happy to have one more way to protest it.
4) Some members of my local community share my upset about how our taxes are collected and abused and I wish to show them support in expressing our collective frustration.
I will not be there because Glen Beck or Sean Hannity (or even Alex Jones) told me to be … no matter how badly some folk want to believe this is so.
I spent a large part of my day yesterday listening to disparaging comments directed at these “tea-partiers” by many in the media, some made by my own friends and political compatriots. Many right wing pundits have latched onto this protest idea as if it is their own and many on the perceived left now see this action as a brazen, corporate attack on their shiny new president. With a Democrat now firmly ensconced in office, its easy for them to imagine that all of the people who will be involved today are Republicans or right-wingers or racists.
Well, I’ll be one of those “lunatics” and I am not a Republican, a right-winger or a racist. I know many others who will be out there as well who are not so easily or accurately defined by these labels. In fact, the organizer of our local protest is a Vietnam veteran who has been fairly active in the peace movement for years. He does not belong to either major political party (he dismisses them both as “War, Inc.”).
While he may not share many of my more progressive views, he is a good and respectful man and he is also a successful tax resistor. It is pretty clear to me that he is not lead by people like Beck or Hannity (or by anyone else, for that matter). He seems to be a pretty well-read guy who figures things out for himself.
To me, this situation is similar to how all the peace vigils suddenly ended once Obama was elected. Why did this happen? The wars certainly aren’t over! Guantanamo certainly isn’t closed. There are currently more mercenaries in Iraq than at any point previous. Extraordinary rendition has continued. Why then, don’t the peace vigils continue? Were they really just anti-Bush vigils?
Many would level this accusation at the whole anti-war movement. They would say that we were just working with moveon.org to protest Bush in order to get a Democrat elected. Well, I was definitely not out there for those reasons. I was out there to protest a war for resource that we didn’t need to be involved in. The lack of a substantial peace movement today makes me scratch the old noggin, though. Were the right-wing pundits correct about the bulk of us?
I have finally realized that many in the Peace movement really do only object to war when it is clear that the war in question is a Republican war. But the criticism concerning ulterior motive was regularly leveled at all of us by conservative pundits and this is unfair. Many people did only fill the streets because moveon.org told them to but it is of vital importance to know that there were also many of us who were not there merely to support corporate machine politics.
While there is no doubt that some among us may have been wearing Democratic Party T-shirts under their anti-war uniforms and while they may have put those uniforms up on that shelf in the back of their closet (at least until the next “changing of the guard”), these people are not the whole peace movement. Not by a long stretch.
In my world, being an advocate for peace is still absolutely necessary, especially now that the Democrats are running the show. When a “bad” war falls under the jurisdiction of the Democratic Party, it doesn’t, all of a sudden, become a “good”war. The death toll (of both American soldiers and Middle Eastern civilians) doesn’t suddenly become a necessary and incremental step towards the peace. It is still a terrible waste of human life perpetrated by resource-hungry corporations and our military industrial complex. It still needs to be opposed!
During the Bush regime, many in the right-wing media excoriated anyone who was seen as supporting moveon.org or UFPJ or Code Pink, all of whom were involved in organizing protests and vigils. I never went to a single protest or rally coerced to do so by any of these groups (though one or more of them may have had their hand in the planning or promotion). To paint me as a Democrat and a follower just because I was there, rather than a principled peace advocate, is entirely unfair.
Now that the fake corporate party shoe is on the other fake corporate-party foot, I feel it is equally incorrect to say that everyone out there today opposing the collection and expenditure of taxes by our federal government is automatically being lead by right wing pundits and the Republican Party. Not correct! Some may well be there for these reasons, but not all of us. Don’t forget that. I will be at a tax protest today for several reasons …
1) I am no lawyer but I believe that it is unconstitutional to collect taxes on wages. Prior to interpretation by the courts, this actually seems pretty obvious and is stated quite clearly in our founding documents.
2) Based on what I have read, it does seem that the 16th amendment (the one allowing the eventual birth of the federal income tax) was never properly ratified. The court that finally claimed it to be properly ratified was stating this in relation to its use in collecting income made by sale of property and not income derived from a person’s labor.
3) I can’t think of too many things I like that the federal government (run by either major party) has done with my tax money in pretty much all of my adult years and I am very happy to have one more way to protest it.
4) Some members of my local community share my upset about how our taxes are collected and abused and I wish to show them support in expressing our collective frustration.
I will not be there because Glen Beck or Sean Hannity (or even Alex Jones) told me to be … no matter how badly some folk want to believe this is so.
Monday, April 13, 2009
Global Foundries - Economic Development?
Wearing my business owner’s hat, I just have to ask … “How can I get me some of that free taxpayer money that AMD/Global Foundries is getting from New York State?” They are receiving a cash and pilot subsidy package amounting to between $800,000 and $1,500,000 per job (depending on which job projections you feel are most accurate).
I’m just kidding, of course. I don’t actually desire public money to run my private business. In fact, as with most business owners, I would never even think of demanding that the public support my for-profit business. That’s the very nature of being in business; you ask the public to support you by voting with their dollars, buying your product or service but I see it as completely indefensible to force the public to support you no matter how prevalent the practice or how acceptable your golfing buddies may find it to be.
Is there really no pride left in corporate America at all?
There are services our government is supposed to perform. They are supposed to do things like fix roads and make sure our elections are fair (and I think many of us see them as being incapable of handling these relatively simple tasks at times). Should they really also be deciding for us which entities are worthy of massive corporate welfare benefits and which are not? I feel that business has absolutely no right to suckle at the public’s teat, especially without said public’s permission.
These lines have been seriously muddied over the last several decades as occasional, support-oriented, economic aid has given way to massive and regular entitlement. The welfare recipient corporations have attuned themselves to a system requiring them to compete with each for “economic development” packages on one level or another. We citizens have to start putting our collective foot down. The time for such nonsense is over. We are in a serious recession. We do need jobs but we need sustainable jobs, not ones paid for with the equivalent of counterfeit money, money we will be expected to pay back with interest.
Simple math dictates that AMD’s original projection of 800 jobs divided into a $1.2 billion dollar subsidy equals over a million and a half dollars per job and that is just ridiculous! I have some questions for the conspirators in our state government who are intending to get away with this.
1. AMD is losing substantial money every quarter. Given that, would any bank in the world lend them this kind of money, never mind just give it to them with basically no strings attached?
2. Even considering secondary and tertiary development, what exact formula has been used to determine that this plant will be worth $1.5 million per projected job? While others may trust what consultants have to say on the matter, I want to see the actual numbers that lowed our elected officials to see this “investment” as justifiable.
3. This entire deal is based on microchips made in the USA competing successfully against similar chips being produced in China and India. How will AMD be competitive, post-NAFTA, against what amounts to wage slavery in the developing world?
When these questions are answered perhaps I can stop being such a Pollyanna. Until then, I will continue to see this as yet one more egregious cash grab made by people who obviously don’t care who they hurt, using taxpayer funds to enrich themselves and their cronies.
I’m just kidding, of course. I don’t actually desire public money to run my private business. In fact, as with most business owners, I would never even think of demanding that the public support my for-profit business. That’s the very nature of being in business; you ask the public to support you by voting with their dollars, buying your product or service but I see it as completely indefensible to force the public to support you no matter how prevalent the practice or how acceptable your golfing buddies may find it to be.
Is there really no pride left in corporate America at all?
There are services our government is supposed to perform. They are supposed to do things like fix roads and make sure our elections are fair (and I think many of us see them as being incapable of handling these relatively simple tasks at times). Should they really also be deciding for us which entities are worthy of massive corporate welfare benefits and which are not? I feel that business has absolutely no right to suckle at the public’s teat, especially without said public’s permission.
These lines have been seriously muddied over the last several decades as occasional, support-oriented, economic aid has given way to massive and regular entitlement. The welfare recipient corporations have attuned themselves to a system requiring them to compete with each for “economic development” packages on one level or another. We citizens have to start putting our collective foot down. The time for such nonsense is over. We are in a serious recession. We do need jobs but we need sustainable jobs, not ones paid for with the equivalent of counterfeit money, money we will be expected to pay back with interest.
Simple math dictates that AMD’s original projection of 800 jobs divided into a $1.2 billion dollar subsidy equals over a million and a half dollars per job and that is just ridiculous! I have some questions for the conspirators in our state government who are intending to get away with this.
1. AMD is losing substantial money every quarter. Given that, would any bank in the world lend them this kind of money, never mind just give it to them with basically no strings attached?
2. Even considering secondary and tertiary development, what exact formula has been used to determine that this plant will be worth $1.5 million per projected job? While others may trust what consultants have to say on the matter, I want to see the actual numbers that lowed our elected officials to see this “investment” as justifiable.
3. This entire deal is based on microchips made in the USA competing successfully against similar chips being produced in China and India. How will AMD be competitive, post-NAFTA, against what amounts to wage slavery in the developing world?
When these questions are answered perhaps I can stop being such a Pollyanna. Until then, I will continue to see this as yet one more egregious cash grab made by people who obviously don’t care who they hurt, using taxpayer funds to enrich themselves and their cronies.
Saturday, April 11, 2009
The Adirondack Phantoms?
Glens Falls is my home. It has been for many years now. Our little city famously lost its AHL franchise, the mighty Adirondack Red Wings, in 1999. That’s when the league decided that two of its franchises could survive just 50 miles away from each other. They gave the River Rats the go ahead to set up shop at the Knick and the rest is history.
They were wrong and both hockey markets have suffered many seasons of low turnout and disappointed fans ever since. In Glens Falls, this has meant that we, the taxpayers, have been left to foot the bill for a 5,000 seat arena with a population of just over 14,000 people.
Since the Wings left home, two UHL franchises have tried their luck and failed; the Icehawks and the Frostbite. While those of us who love hockey latched right on to both, we all knew that this new hockey was not the same as the old hockey. Many came to see an occasional game but few religiously marked their calendars and made a serious effort the way they did when the Wings were here.
There are many in our community who just want to throw in the towel. They are sick and tired of hearing about how badly the hockey community wants to see AHL level play again. I am an absolute believer, though. I know there is a stalwart community of hockey fans here that will pony up the money to buy season tickets when the AHL returns.
Last year, the city signed a deal with Global Spectrum, a private management company from Philadelphia, and they now handle booking, scheduling and promotion for all events at the Civic Center. It just so happens that Global Spectrum is also employed by an AHL team called the Philadelphia Phantoms and, it just so happens that the Phantoms will be homeless for about three or four years as their new arena is being built back home. Can anyone say, “Welcome back, great hockey, to Glens Falls?” I would be lying if I said I was not excited at the idea of having truly great hockey played here again a mere stone’s throw away from my home and business.
That said, it was recently reported that Glens Falls suffered the highest unemployment spike in New York State and most of us are eager to see some relief. A badly made deal with big subsidies given to a sports team (which most taxpayers rightly view as a diversion, at best) would be a huge mistake.
I attended the final River Rats game in Glens Falls this past weekend and there were notices taped to the seats that warmed my heart. They were letting hockey fans know that the Phantoms are seriously considering coming to town and spelling out that the magic number is 2500 season tickets for them to see Glens Falls as a viable option. That’s a lot of tickets … but that’s also refreshingly direct.
As a business owner, I see most subsidies as little more than corporate welfare thinly-disguised as economic development and I love that this team is being so up front about their actual financial needs. I would have seen this as a respectable move in the best of economic times but, in a recession, this was, unquestionably, taking the high road. The Phantoms definitely have earned my respect for not pushing our community hard to make the many pay for the enjoyment of the few. That would not be fair and I am glad that they know this.
If the hockey community is really big enough and enthusiastic enough to support an AHL team here, then we need to sell those season tickets and we will have ourselves a team. If we don’t sell them, the Phantoms will (sadly) go somewhere else but, at least, the taxpayers won’t be saddled with yet one more burden.
The Phantoms are already proving themselves to be a class act. As far as I’m concerned, they’re already my team!
They were wrong and both hockey markets have suffered many seasons of low turnout and disappointed fans ever since. In Glens Falls, this has meant that we, the taxpayers, have been left to foot the bill for a 5,000 seat arena with a population of just over 14,000 people.
Since the Wings left home, two UHL franchises have tried their luck and failed; the Icehawks and the Frostbite. While those of us who love hockey latched right on to both, we all knew that this new hockey was not the same as the old hockey. Many came to see an occasional game but few religiously marked their calendars and made a serious effort the way they did when the Wings were here.
There are many in our community who just want to throw in the towel. They are sick and tired of hearing about how badly the hockey community wants to see AHL level play again. I am an absolute believer, though. I know there is a stalwart community of hockey fans here that will pony up the money to buy season tickets when the AHL returns.
Last year, the city signed a deal with Global Spectrum, a private management company from Philadelphia, and they now handle booking, scheduling and promotion for all events at the Civic Center. It just so happens that Global Spectrum is also employed by an AHL team called the Philadelphia Phantoms and, it just so happens that the Phantoms will be homeless for about three or four years as their new arena is being built back home. Can anyone say, “Welcome back, great hockey, to Glens Falls?” I would be lying if I said I was not excited at the idea of having truly great hockey played here again a mere stone’s throw away from my home and business.
That said, it was recently reported that Glens Falls suffered the highest unemployment spike in New York State and most of us are eager to see some relief. A badly made deal with big subsidies given to a sports team (which most taxpayers rightly view as a diversion, at best) would be a huge mistake.
I attended the final River Rats game in Glens Falls this past weekend and there were notices taped to the seats that warmed my heart. They were letting hockey fans know that the Phantoms are seriously considering coming to town and spelling out that the magic number is 2500 season tickets for them to see Glens Falls as a viable option. That’s a lot of tickets … but that’s also refreshingly direct.
As a business owner, I see most subsidies as little more than corporate welfare thinly-disguised as economic development and I love that this team is being so up front about their actual financial needs. I would have seen this as a respectable move in the best of economic times but, in a recession, this was, unquestionably, taking the high road. The Phantoms definitely have earned my respect for not pushing our community hard to make the many pay for the enjoyment of the few. That would not be fair and I am glad that they know this.
If the hockey community is really big enough and enthusiastic enough to support an AHL team here, then we need to sell those season tickets and we will have ourselves a team. If we don’t sell them, the Phantoms will (sadly) go somewhere else but, at least, the taxpayers won’t be saddled with yet one more burden.
The Phantoms are already proving themselves to be a class act. As far as I’m concerned, they’re already my team!
Friday, April 10, 2009
Finally, A Progressive President
Obama is unable to say the words “single-payer health care.”
Some of you reading this are saying, “Yeah? So? What’s that, anyway … single-payer health care?” Well, simply put, its a health care system very similar to the Canadian system. It’s pretty much the same as HR 676, sponsored by John Conyers in Congress and it’s a lot like like the new bill (S.703) put forward by Senator Bernie Sanders. Basically, its new and improved Medicare for all.
Imagine there’s no HMO-style delivery system sitting right smack in the middle of your health care dollar, siphoning off 25-35% of your premium! The savings would be intense, as you might imagine. Imagine also that doctors are able to just treat you without ever having to wonder what level of care your insurance company will allow them to employ. Imagine that there are no forms to fill out and that you can go anywhere you like to seek treatment without any co-pays.
What’s the trick? No trick. I went to school in Canada and have ex-pat relatives who live there and the Canadian system is absolutely amazing. I could relate personal anecdotes all day about how terrible the American health care system can be and how great the Canadian system can be by comparison but, for the moment, lets just stick to the objective part of the equation.
It costs Canadians about $5200 per person for their single-payer health care system and this is about $2700 less per person than we will spend this year, per capita, in the United States. This means that we already spend more than enough to cover everybody. That’s the dirty little secret of corporate health care propaganda. It would actually be cheaper to cover everybody. Canadians also live a full year longer than we do. That’s another dirty little secret. You can do the math.
If, as the Rush Limbaugh crowd would attest, our new president is such a “socialist”, I have to wonder why he is not trumpeting this (seemingly, Communist) conspiracy that would make us all healthy while saving us money? Why are Democratic apologists falling all over each other trying to explain to us about “political feasibility” and achieving “the possible”.
“After all”, they say, “the guy’s only been in office for a few months. Give him a break. He’s got to work on these things one small step at a time.” He is currently advocating a forced HMO plan that would be no more effective or affordable than asking Dow Chemical to grow our food and his party is telling us he has a plan.
You’d think that this guy who just land-slided the election on a campaign of hope and change would be a far better strategist than these apologists are claiming. He just told his supporters that we are in desperate economic straits and that he would need to print several trillion dollars and give it out to people (mostly to people other than those who are actually hurting) and … everyone is actually buying it! They say, “Well, he’s got to do something, right?” Congress debates for about fourteen minutes and then says, “Okay, Barack. We trust you. You got to do what you got to do.”
We all know that Obama is riding a very short wave. It will end soon and now is probably the only time during his first four years that he might be able to approach congress with something this important and actually expect to get it passed. Even so, he’s pulling a Hillary Clinton on us instead and everyone seems to be buying it!
If Obama was really a socially-conscious guy, he would go on TV tomorrow and he would say, “Almost 20,000 Americans are dying every year because they lack access to health care and I can’t stand it anymore! Not on my watch! It’s a crisis and I’m going to fix it. I have a plan and it will save us money and it will also cover everyone. Similar models are being used in dozens of other countries around the world and it would simply be stupid not to follow their lead just because the HMO lobbies tell us we have to.”
But, he’s not going to do this and I don’t actually blame him. I blame you, the Obama voter. It’s your fault. You voted for him and you did so in a safe state where it made no difference at all. I told you he didn’t have a progressive bone in his body and you said, “That’s okay, Matt. We’ll hold his feet to the fire. Look at the movement! Look at all the young people! Look at all the excitement Obama generates.”
I’ll believe the “feet to the fire” rhetoric works when I see some evidence of it. Go ahead and pressure him like you all said you would. Please prove me wrong! I would really, honestly, love for you to do so. Please do so! Every day that you wait, about 50 more Americans will die. That’s more than six 9/11’s every year and you could prevent them all by simply making good on your campaign promise.
Some of you reading this are saying, “Yeah? So? What’s that, anyway … single-payer health care?” Well, simply put, its a health care system very similar to the Canadian system. It’s pretty much the same as HR 676, sponsored by John Conyers in Congress and it’s a lot like like the new bill (S.703) put forward by Senator Bernie Sanders. Basically, its new and improved Medicare for all.
Imagine there’s no HMO-style delivery system sitting right smack in the middle of your health care dollar, siphoning off 25-35% of your premium! The savings would be intense, as you might imagine. Imagine also that doctors are able to just treat you without ever having to wonder what level of care your insurance company will allow them to employ. Imagine that there are no forms to fill out and that you can go anywhere you like to seek treatment without any co-pays.
What’s the trick? No trick. I went to school in Canada and have ex-pat relatives who live there and the Canadian system is absolutely amazing. I could relate personal anecdotes all day about how terrible the American health care system can be and how great the Canadian system can be by comparison but, for the moment, lets just stick to the objective part of the equation.
It costs Canadians about $5200 per person for their single-payer health care system and this is about $2700 less per person than we will spend this year, per capita, in the United States. This means that we already spend more than enough to cover everybody. That’s the dirty little secret of corporate health care propaganda. It would actually be cheaper to cover everybody. Canadians also live a full year longer than we do. That’s another dirty little secret. You can do the math.
If, as the Rush Limbaugh crowd would attest, our new president is such a “socialist”, I have to wonder why he is not trumpeting this (seemingly, Communist) conspiracy that would make us all healthy while saving us money? Why are Democratic apologists falling all over each other trying to explain to us about “political feasibility” and achieving “the possible”.
“After all”, they say, “the guy’s only been in office for a few months. Give him a break. He’s got to work on these things one small step at a time.” He is currently advocating a forced HMO plan that would be no more effective or affordable than asking Dow Chemical to grow our food and his party is telling us he has a plan.
You’d think that this guy who just land-slided the election on a campaign of hope and change would be a far better strategist than these apologists are claiming. He just told his supporters that we are in desperate economic straits and that he would need to print several trillion dollars and give it out to people (mostly to people other than those who are actually hurting) and … everyone is actually buying it! They say, “Well, he’s got to do something, right?” Congress debates for about fourteen minutes and then says, “Okay, Barack. We trust you. You got to do what you got to do.”
We all know that Obama is riding a very short wave. It will end soon and now is probably the only time during his first four years that he might be able to approach congress with something this important and actually expect to get it passed. Even so, he’s pulling a Hillary Clinton on us instead and everyone seems to be buying it!
If Obama was really a socially-conscious guy, he would go on TV tomorrow and he would say, “Almost 20,000 Americans are dying every year because they lack access to health care and I can’t stand it anymore! Not on my watch! It’s a crisis and I’m going to fix it. I have a plan and it will save us money and it will also cover everyone. Similar models are being used in dozens of other countries around the world and it would simply be stupid not to follow their lead just because the HMO lobbies tell us we have to.”
But, he’s not going to do this and I don’t actually blame him. I blame you, the Obama voter. It’s your fault. You voted for him and you did so in a safe state where it made no difference at all. I told you he didn’t have a progressive bone in his body and you said, “That’s okay, Matt. We’ll hold his feet to the fire. Look at the movement! Look at all the young people! Look at all the excitement Obama generates.”
I’ll believe the “feet to the fire” rhetoric works when I see some evidence of it. Go ahead and pressure him like you all said you would. Please prove me wrong! I would really, honestly, love for you to do so. Please do so! Every day that you wait, about 50 more Americans will die. That’s more than six 9/11’s every year and you could prevent them all by simply making good on your campaign promise.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
