"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." - Thomas Jefferson
You gotta love the Republican party right now. "You'll never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy."
The latest debate over health care reform has truly taken a turn for the worse. As we get closer to the August deadline for a decision both sides are ratcheting up the rhetoric. Independents are starting to shift positions on this bill, H.R. 3200, and even the Bluedog Democrats are starting to waver.
By taking a turn for the worse, I mean that all rational discourse and debate has been thrown out the window by the Republican Party.
Instead of presenting their own plan for health care reform they have chosen to say to their followers and constituents that President Obama is trying to institute completely nationalized healthcare; otherwise known as "Obamacare." While President Obama is trying to institute a public option for those who don't qualify or can't afford insurance, in no way will the public option become mandatory for everyone. If you choose to, you can keep your old healthcare plan.
The republicans have been scoring points with this argument, however, and the public's opinion of H.R. 3200 has taken a serious hit in the past few weeks. The republicans must smell the blood in the water because they have begun to put on the full court press against the administration; and have increased the scare tactics and campaigns against this bill.
This is comical because initially there was some bi-partisan support for a bill of this type, but lately the "party of NO" has gone back to their old ways of fear mongering, negativity, and generally immature behavior in terms of framing this debate.
Healthcare reform, if done right, could be one of the most important things that our generation accomplishes. I think there are some in the party who have good ideas about how this should be done. However, it seems to me that the Republican party is far more concerned with having President Obama fail, than they are about the well being of the American people.
This is evident in Jim DeMint's recent quotation:
"If we're able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Waterloo. It will break him"
When later asked if he would back away from that comment, DeMint said he would not and that:
"We have to stop his politics"
This is why careerism in politics was something that the founding fathers warned against.
In the immortal words of Samuel L. Jackson, "Enough is enough!"
I was born and raised in Massachusetts and love this state for many reasons, but I can't for the life of me figure out what our state representatives are doing for us. The latest offense is the MBTA rate hike throughout the state. The MBTA is all ready going to be receiving additional money from the state from the recent sales tax increase, which was raised from 5% to 6.25%. Thank you state legislature! Instead of actually coming up with some intelligent plans and/or budget cuts; you've decided to take the easy road and simply raise taxes.
One would think that the money from the state would be enough, at least for a little while. Apparently not, as they feel the need to raise the fares on everyone now. I understand that we're in a recession, and possibly even a depression, but consumers are hurting too. Maybe if the MBTA was managed better, and fixed the ridiculous pension system that it has, we wouldn't have to foot the bill as much.
In the past couple of months the Massachusetts taxpayers have been completely taken advantage of. The pension system in the Commonwealth has so many problems and loopholes, that it's no wonder we have such high taxes in this state. Also, Massachusetts is one of only 8 states in the entire United States of America that has a permanent legislature.
What's a permanent legislature, you ask? It means that our state representatives are full time employees of the state, and therefore are eligible for all of the benefits associated with that status. In contrast, New Hampshire does not have a permanent legislature and their representatives all have other jobs, and only get paid around $200 plus mileage for their two year terms. Think about how much money we could save if we did that!
No more excise taxes! I hate excise taxes! Quick tidbit, excise taxes were instated during the Korean War to support the effort and help the state. They were supposed to be repealed, or at least reduced, after the war but never were because we got addicted to the money.
So how do we change our legislature to a non-permanent one? Get ready for this, the state legislature has to approve it! Now, if you were a representative of our Commonwealth reaping all the benefits of your status, pension, and minimal job requirements; would you be eager to change that system?
But the problem isn't just the legislature, it's the people of Massachusetts. Where is the outrage? Where are the mass protests in the streets, or in front of Beacon Hill? If we don't hold our legislators accountable, then why would they change their ways? We sit idly by while they increase tax after tax (gas tax anyone?), approve pension loopholes (perhaps not even realizing it's in the bill), and don't truly fight for their constituents when it comes to things like MBTA fare hikes.
Enough is truly enough.
Here's the thing, either you believe the constitution is a living breathing document that is subject to change (amendments) or you don't. Granted, there are certain inalienable rights that we possess as American citizens and the foundations of the constitution are strong and should be adhered to. However, it is my belief that times and people change and therefore the constitution should act as a guideline to determine if a law or amendment is unconstitutional.
As our citizenry changes and becomes more diverse, it is important that these groups are represented in all branches of government. No matter who you are, you have certain thoughts and feelings about various subjects in life and often these are carried into what you do. As these minority groups get more and more political power their views and positions are reflected more and more in government.
For example, if we strictly adhered to the original writing of the constitution without exception would blacks still be considered 3/5 of a person? Would women have the right to vote? Would we have all the civil rights that we have today? The answer is categorically no. It was because of the circumstances of the times, and the thoughts and feelings of the judges at that time that we now have these rights. Laws were made, which adhered to the basic principles of the constitution, but were not explicitly written into the constitution. For example, abortion is covered under the right to privacy.
It is for this reason that many people are excited about having not only another woman, but a hispanic woman who came from a poor background. The argument goes that because of her background and race she will be more empathetic to a very large portion of our population. In fact, in probably 10-20 years hispanics will make up the majority in this country.
Now, is it OK for a justice of the supreme court, or any judge for that matter, to be more sympathetic to one side or the other regardless of the law? Absolutely not. But does her background give her a "unique" perspective on the bench that perhaps many of the other justices who grew up privileged do not have? Most likely.
As long as she adheres to the law and the constitution, which her decisions clearly show that she has, I think she could be a valuable addition to the Supreme Court.
As for me, I just want a judge with a history of sound, logical, and fair jurisprudence. I couldn't care less about the race or gender of that person.
Since Obama has been elected he has not been able work effectively with Wall St. and the stock market has continued to tumble. Also, Timothy Geithner is not helping the case, what with his extremely vague opening speech about how we're going to fix the economy; a speech which contained no definitive points on how we're actually going to fix the economy.
And I think that many conservatives are correct in their assumption that Obama's using "clever politics" in getting all of this spending provisioned in this bill for things like Healthcare and Education.
But I happen to agree with Obama's agenda and if this is how he can get the money needed to fix this country then so be it. And don't tell me that if the Republicans were in power they wouldn't be taking advantage of this economic situation to make the Bush tax cuts permanent and continue to stuff the pockets of the wealthiest Americans and purport that "trickle down economics" will continue to rule the day and fix the economy. The major difference here is the old trickle down economics vs. the Keynesian view of economics. I think we've seen how trickle down economics has worked for the past eight years.
I also think it is great that we are investing in the sciences, "going green", universal healthcare, and education, but Peggy Noonan made a great point on Morning Joe this morning. In a nutshell she said that we need to stabilize the economy first, and Obama should be focused primarily on stabilizing the economy, even in his speeches, and then he can roll out his agenda and go on tangents about why we need universal healthcare and education for everyone. I happen to agree with Ms. Noonan on this point.
The Obama administration has done well in most areas thus far, with the exception of getting the stock market to turn around and bring us out of this recession/depression. There are roughly 13 opening in Treasury that nobody wants, and the Obama administration is having a difficult time filling them. Hopefully we all realize that getting us out of this recession is going to take time and a lot of MONEY, but I think that the Obama administration could be doing a better job of getting us, and Wall St., some definitive answers on how they're going to start cleaning up this mess.
Now that being said, am I the only person who thinks the Republican party is a joke today? The minute Obama was elected, who becomes the face of the RNC? A black guy, Michael Steele, and an Indian, Bobby Jindal. This is why I really can't stand the Republican party; they must really think we're a bunch of mindless lemmings. It's almost as if they said, "Oh so you want a black guy? We'll give you a black guy!" As if race is all that matters here.
Am I alone on this? Does anyone else see through this? As much of a joke as this whole debacle between the RNC and Rush Limbaugh is, which is brilliant politics on the part of the Obama administartion I might add, I happen to think that Rush speaks for a vast majority of conservatives; as sad as that is.
OK, I'm getting off my soapbox.
Americans made history on Tuesday, November 4, 2008. Not only did Americans elect the first African-American President, but they also decided that they wanted real change to come to Washington and the country as a whole. Looking back at this election season, this whole campaign was about a choice between holding onto the politics of the past, or embracing the 21st century and looking to dictate what the tone will be and the direction the United States will take.
Of particular significance with the election of Barack Obama is the reaction around the world. When it was announced that Barack Obama was elected President of the United States there was streaming video of celebrations throughout the globe. It is clear that with the election of Barack Obama as President, the damage done by the Bush administration to America's standing in the world has begun to be repaired. Countries around the world are beginning to look at America as a beacon of freedom and true democracy again. It remains to be seen if an Obama administration will maintain this view but it is a telling sign of an increasingly globalized world.
With the overwhelming victory that Barack Obama and the democrats share in this election, it is clear that the American people are looking for this administration to reverse the tide of eight years of failed policies that have been a major contributor of the current state of the nation. In addition, it symbolizes a rejection of the Republican party's message. American's are tired of the divisive politics that have plagued this country for decades.
This victory also demonstrates that Americans have embraced Barack Obama's world view, and are eager to move ahead in the 21st century. The cold war is over, the population is becoming increasingly diverse with projections that whites will soon be the minority in the United States, and younger generations are stepping up and ensuring that they have a say in the direction the country is headed.
