Mid-term elections are just around the corner and the press will be hot-and-heavy on the weaknesses of the Democratic Party and Obama. I thought I would take a look at the current administration without the noise and shouting.

In 2007-08 the United States, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research, (an independent group of economists), was entering a downturn that was not seen since the Great Depression of the 1930s. Manufacturing was at a 26 year low, in ten month period from January 2007 until November1, 2007, over 1.2 million jobs were lost, unemployment had risen to 7.3% and was climbing, we had incurred over 750 billion in war debt from Iraq and Afghanistan, lost nearly 4,000 Service Personnel, had the largest amount of home foreclosures on record, and most of the major banks along with brokerage houses, automobile and insurance businesses were on the brink of failing.

Of course in our day-today routine of smart-phones, smart-pads, Facebook, twitter, inter-net googling we have forgotten what was, and are only concentrating on what is catching our eye at the moment; who’s being banned from the NFL for spousal abuse, who is the most recent celeb death, what TV show is going to break-out in sweeps week, and who won AGT. All of these rank very high on our “can’t live without” meter.

Unless it happened to us personally we have forgotten the pain of losing our jobs and the embarrassment of going to the unemployment office, the countless interviews for lower paying positions, and the fear that Congress will not extend unemployment benefits and the complete loss of our savings and possible eviction from our home.

All the time this was happening the Republican Party was led by the most vitriolic of peoples whose declared agenda was to be solely in opposition to anything and everything that President Obama proposed. Despite this in his first two years with a Democratically controlled Congress, Obama was able to get a stimulus package, (The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act), consisting of 787 billion dollars passed. This Act kept 1.6 million people working, banks, insurance companies, and numerous other businesses alive, gave the States a leg up out of the hole they were in and provided enormous relief for the average American. Additionally Obama was able to get funding for the U.S. Auto industry which kept GM and Chrysler from shuttering their plants and saving by the auto-maker’s account 3 million jobs. All-in-all he put a patch on the hole created by the Bush Administration and a Republican Congress that ruled from 2001 through 2008.

Of course our society being one of instant gratification and expectation felt that once Obama was elected we’d wake up to an immediate reversal of an economic situation that took eight years to create. However, five-and-a-half years later, unemployment dropped below the October 2009’s high of 10 percent and finishing August at 6.1, back to levels not seen since August 2008. This means an addition of 3.2 million jobs.

Additionally we have dropped the deficit from 10% of the GDP in 2008 to 3% in 2014 with a projected balanced budget in 2015 (part of which is caused by higher tax revenues of 8%), U.S. crude oil production is up 40% over 2005-06 causing lower oil imports, and there has been a doubling of coal exports from 2006 as natural gas production has increased to record levels replacing coal as a source of energy. Inflation has been held in check at slightly over 2% each year Obama has been in office, as of June 2014 new home sales increased by 22% over 2008 and in January 2014 foreclosures had dropped to a six year low.

And contrary to the critics the Affordable Health Care Act is beginning to show signs of doing what it were designed for; bringing coverage to those who could not afford it and reducing the overall coast of health care.

Obama has also been responsible for initiating legislation that includes and expansion of Pell Grants, 4 billion dollars for States who reform education, boosted fuel energy standards, increased various support programs for Veterans inclusive of 78 billion more for education training, passed credit card reforms, established pay equality laws, instituted new banking regulations that prevent speculation, increased national food inspection programs, expanded wilderness and watershed protection, expanded health care for children, increased funding to stem cell research, and many other pieces of legislation benefitting the public as a whole.

One other thing, he killed Osama Bin Laden.

Now has he been completely successful, of course not. He’d probably be getting between a B and B+ on a grade level. We still have way too many long-term unemployed in the Country; we are faced with deteriorating infra-structures, he mishandled the Affordable Health Care rollout, and we are involved in a new military action that has arisen from the destabilization of the Mid-East to name a few, but overall considering the pile of manure he inherited when first taking office he’s done a commendable job.

It should be mentioned that many of his accomplishments came prior to when the Republicans took control of the House of Representatives. They have since spent the last three-and-a-half years having one policy which was to say “No” to everything proposed. They bottled appointments to the bench, (49 nine appointments), eight Chief Financial Officer positions, ( Depts. of Defense, Agriculture, Energy, Housing, Veterans Affairs, Air Force, EPA, and NASA), thirty-six Ambassadors, and two Election Commission Nominees. They shut down the Government in 2013 refusing to raise the spending cap costing the tax payers 24 billion dollars, they have wasted several sessions of Congress passing repeals of the Affordable Health Care Act that they knew would not pass through the Senate, refused to take-up an increase in minimum wage, refused to authorize a jobs bill for the infra-structure of the Country’s roads and bridges, refused to extend the payroll tax credit (effective raising taxes on the middle class), refused to close the loop-hole for corporate tax evasion, had to be embarrassed into extending unemployment benefits, and had 112 filibusters to block over 375 bills in the last two years.

So when November rolls around and you are making up your mind as to who will get your vote, think what would have happened if the Stimulus had not occurred, the motor companies would have been allowed to fail, you could not bid your health insurance or get a Pell grant for your kids college, or your Social Security was privatized, or your parents Medicare was not funded, or that last unemployment check you got just before you went back to work wasn’t there. Think what would be if the banks weren’t forced to pay billions in fines and were still allowed to trade in bad securities, or the EPA couldn’t make the mining industry responsible for their pollution, or no one forced BP to make restitution for their oil spill, or countless other issues that your government makes right for you didn’t happen.

That’s what the Republicans want; no taxes for the rich, no taxes on businesses, no minimum wage increase, open season for insurance companies, no funding for college education, no environmental controls, privatization of Social Security, and reduction or elimination of Medicare and Medicaid. Read their party platform.

Then decide what kind of Country you want. Obama and the Democrats don’t look that bad do they?

Sequester, Fiscal Cliff, potato, patato. We as a country are being led by a pack of ideological jackals that snarl and snap at each other like dogs in heat. Unfortunately neither side is completely in the right. On the Democratic side, the philosophy is that government should be there to help people. Laws, regulations, entitlements are enacted to assure that the consumer is protected from harm, the laborer is given a fair wage and safe working environment, and never again will our population fall off the cliff of total destitute and medical maleficence.
The Republicans have stood for fiscal conservatism, pro-business legislation, a laissez faire approach to everything from healthcare to retirement programs. Each individual is responsible for his/her own fate. Government is there for the infra-structure required to allow the business of capitalism to work and then it should get out of the way.

This Ying and Yang has been going on as long as States Rights versus Federalism has been in existence, in short since the creation of the Country. In the past this process has endured the inevitable corrections when one philosophy outweighed the other to push the Country to extremes. The periods are easy to chart, the post-civil war era that led to the “Robber Barons” which led to Teddy Roosevelt and his attack on big business, and the establishment of the SEC; the 1920s which produced the Wall Street crash and the Depression followed by Franklin Roosevelt and the New Deal; the Johnson Viet Nam War era that led to a militarily industrial economy and backlash far left movement along with a winner take-all administration of Nixon; the tightening of regulations in the late 1970s that produced double-digit inflation and insane finance rates under Carter; the hands-off policies of the Regan-Bush (I) team in the 1980s that led to the FSLIC debacle and the revival of the Democrats under Clinton, and another Bush (II) policy of open capitalism that led to the great recession of 2008.


Now we are facing another clash of ideologies as the Country is confronting a decision that exceeds the financial trappings in which it is wrapped. Unfortunately, the Republicans have deviated from their own base philosophy to an extreme far-right that prevents them from recognizing the need to compromise in order for capitalism to work.  The Democrats on the other hand have been using the crisis to feather their political bed by finger-pointing rather than aggressively using their election-gained advantage to force a solid resolution.


There is no doubt that the National Debt is too high. 12 years of unfunded international war has added trillions of dollars to the debt. Much like the 1960s through the mid-1970s the Defense Department throughout the period from 2001 through 2009 had been the economic engine. Coupled with the lack of banking regulation, reduced taxes, and an anything goes approach the Country is now paying the minimum payment on their credit card while racking up additional debt from interest.
When I say the Democrats botched their election advantage I mean they settled for a watered down answer to the bigger problem and accepted a modest tax increase on people making $500k or more rather than demanding an increase to the debt limit, more stimulus spending, and tax increases that would actually make a difference. Instead, Obama meekly settled for a small increase in revenues while agreeing to 2 trillion in cuts. He also kicked the can further down the road leading to the current mess. In my opinion if we were going off the cliff, we should have done it then.

On the Republican side they have painted themselves into a corner without any hope of being labeled obstructionists. Their latest move is to suggest the Democrats decide which social programs will be cut trying to shift the blame rather than taking the responsibility for causing the crises from failure to realize that revenues MUST be generated and stimulus money must be spent long term. They have disregarded input from the Federal Reserve head and the Bowles Simpson data which they supported two years ago.

This is not Rocket Science. We need two things, an increase in revenues and control of expenses. The revenue side will come from two sources; a growing economy and taxes. The Expense Control will come from the elimination of out dated entitlement programs, policing of Medicare, and an increase in the Social Security Cap which would make it solvent for the next 75 years.

The economy cannot grow without additional stimulus that allows people to spend money. Right now housing rates are low enough due to the Fed’s policies that people are buying houses and because of regulation they can actually afford the houses they buy. Infrastructure jobs on road construction, bridge rebuilds, urban programs and many more items are available to Federal dollars if the Congress will release the funds. This applies as well to new R&D start-up companies and much like the development of the Internet in the 1990s, this would bring new jobs, and a new tax base to the Federal coffers. For those that say a tax increase on the wealthy would cause a damper on job investment, this has already been proven as baloney from multiple independent economic sources. There is so much money on the sidelines waiting for Congress to get its act together that once a definitive plan of action takes place investment in business will open up like it did in 1993-94.

What’s lacking is not a sequester of the existing governmental departments, but of the House of Representatives. They should be locked up and told to get it done for the benefit of not either the Republican Party or the Democrats, but for the health and well-being of the people they represent, all of the people.

Americans are constantly warned about the influence of lobbyists in government, the buy-ins by big business, unions, left and right wing groups. We are told how the Congress is up for sale to the highest bidder. Oddly enough this is a theme that both Republicans and Democrats expound upon. It is true in many ways that our government is formed by those entities and voices that can afford to impact legislation or speak loudly enough to be heard, whether that be relaxation or strengthening of regulations. In most cases the laws created or impeded are for business as a whole. Additionally the process generally allows modifications and compromises to eliminate the extreme views or crippling requirements.


No so with the stranglehold that an individual citizen has placed upon the Congress of the United States of America, one Grover Norquist a different type of lobbyist.

Norquist has his own agenda, one which he has been developing for decades since he left Harvard. Boarding on the maniacal, Grover objects to all types of government, whether it be for good or bad. In Grover’s World the only thing government would do is stay out of the way or maybe use illegal and/or covert means to promote his idea of democracy.

In Grover’s World the UNITA, (Union for Total Independence of Angola), which he supported, a guerrilla group under the direction of the Maoist Jonas Savimbi, was a means to stomp out Cuban Communism in Africa and it was okay with him that our government under the CIA contributed over $16 million a year from 1986 through 1992 to the group to help their cause, (the Clinton administration passed and Executive Order prohibiting further funding of the organization).

In Grover’s World it’s okay to support networks that allowed Oliver North, to funnel illegal arms to the Nicaraguan Contras from Iran, an act that led to North’s time in prison.

In Grover’s World it’s okay to support RENAMO a guerrilla based group out of Mozambique that had the backing of the CIA but was opposed by the U.S. State Department and one which was responsible for 101 boarder attacks between Mozambique and Zimbabwe in the late nineteen eighties.

In Grover’s World it’s okay to hang out with Jack Abramoff who was convicted on 3 felony counts of defrauding American Indians and was associated with basic payoffs to many U.S. Congressmen including convicted felon Tom DeLay and that Norquist’s organization ATR, while not indicted, was cited by the Senate Committee for Indian Affairs to be a conduit for funds collected by Abramoff to grass roots lobbying campaigns.

Grover Norquist is a bully in the schoolyard. He is not a corporation. He’s not a union. He doesn’t make anything. He doesn’t create jobs. He’s never been a member of Congress, or held an elected office. He’s never tried to change government by putting his ass on the line in an election and taking office. He is a non-corporate lobbyist living on income derived from the wealthy who donate to his Americans For Tax Reform in hopes of not paying their fair share in taxes.

This one man has high-jacked the Republican base and in doing so been the central figure in preventing our ‘elected’ officials from doing their job out of fear. Remember all that money that gets channeled into Congress? Because Grover has so many wealthy clients, he can control who gets what come election time and the Republican side of the isle is scared to death that he’ll turn on those who don’t dance to his tune. For the last decade they have laid down with this flea-ridden dog in order to get donations from some of the wealthiest people in America. Oddly enough ATR represents only a minority of the rich, but those they do have an ability to generate an enormous amount of dollars that can influence local elections when directed by Norquist.

It is time the Republicans move away from this situation and just say “No to Norquist”. They need to regain their independence and return to the established values of their Party, not those of a closet covert CIA wannabe operative who has been associated with felons and guerrillas.

Well, it’s finally over, or is it?
Throughout the night the race moved back and forth until Obama passed the270 electoral vote mark and won a hard fought victory. So now what happens? The divisions in this country are so enormous that healing will be difficult. This election has ended many friendships and quite a few marriages in the mix, so the idea that everyone kisses and makes-up is a little far-fetched.
The Senate and House basically remained the same so the stand-off everyone was hoping would end appears to be still in place like two pit-bulls with a choke-hold on each other’s necks. How do we get back to center? There are people out there who still believe that the President is not an American Citizen. Others who believe everyone making below 20 grand are a bunch of free-loaders for not paying taxes, and still others who think all Republicans have Beelzebub as their father.
I think we start by first knowing that we will never find a compromise for everything we feel as important, but we should try. Instead of disagreeing in such virulent terms, we agree simply to disagree. We recognize that most Americans really care about the well-being of the Country and that their methods of achieving its betterment may differ from that of someone else. No one is right all the time. Ever.
Next frame the needs of the Country into the fewest categories possible a few suggestions could be:

• Jobs
• The Debt
• Military Needs
• Social Security Solvency
• Medicare Reform
• Education
• Necessary Social Responsibilities

Once you have the list form a task force for each of these consisting of moderate representatives of both parties. By that I mean those people who understand the need to compromise. These could be either elected officials of Congress or past members of Congress, past Presidents, or those recommended by each of the party’s National Committees or a combination of them all.
Each of these task forces would be given a timeline, (not more than six months), and a framework with a level of expectations to achieve. One other thing, the Task Force meetings should remain confidential to the press until the work is completed. Assuming these reasonable task force members can complete their assignments, their recommendations then move to a combined House and Senate Task Force for review. Recommendations and changes may be made, however it should be understood from the outset that the basics must be adopted if the goals of the original task force have been met within the interests of the majority of Americans.
It has been said that the two things you do not wish to watch being made are legislation and sausage. That being the case, no one will get everything they want. There may be a reduction of/ or a change in the requirement to receive benefits that impact the poor. There may be an increase in taxes to those making above $150,000 or maybe to the entire country. The Military may have their budget reduced and be required to curtail some of the world’s police work. Education might be totally revamped, and tax incentives for companies to create jobs here may be introduced. Whatever works as a whole for the country.
Of course this is a Utopian idea, and it will never happen, but I could be wrong. I still believe in America and that we can achieve what is best for us, all of us, if we stop shouting and start listening. For those who are depressed about the outcome of the election; the sun will still come up tomorrow and we will continue. The question is will we do it together? Is it over yet?

There’s a new disease that has been diagnosed, called Romnesia. It comes from being exposed to too many lies, half-truths and changes in opinion brought on by Governor Romney in his quest to be everything to everyone. Below is list of how you might determine if you have contracted this deadly infection. If think you have Romnesia, get yourself to the nearest computer and log on to Fact Check.

1. If you’ve changed your political positions more than you’ve changed your underwear…you might have Romnesia.
2. If you honestly believe that there’s a safety net for the poor…you might have Romnesia.
3. If you think the American public is so stupid they can’t remember your comment that 47% of them are free-loaders…you might have Romnesia.
4. If you believe Ryan’s budget will actually reduce the debt even though the GAO says it will add 5 trillion more to it…you might have Romnesia.
5. If you think that the 11 trillion dollar deficit was caused only by the Obama administration…you might have Romnesia.
6. If you believe that Obama has not reduced the unemployment figures by nearly 3 percent…you might have Romnesia.
7. If you think the economy was in good shape in 2008…you might have Romnesia.
8. If you think that Romney cared about the U.S. Auto Industry…you might have Romnesia.
9. If you think Bain Capital was in the business of actually creating  jobs…you might have Romnesia.
10. If you really think we were better off under Bush and a Republican Congress that put us into two wars, raised the deficit by 3 trillion, gutted Environmental laws, and gave the banks and Wall Street free reign…you might have Romnesia.
11. If you think that Romney/Ryan is supportive of women’s rights even though they support all legislation that eviscerates those rights…you might have Romnesia.
12. If you think that Romney’s just one of the good old boys even though his income is over 2 mil a year and he “knows people who own NASCAR teams” …you might have Romnesia.
13. If you think the Salt Lake Olympics actually didn’t cost anything, even though Romney’s Olympic Committee received 1.8 billion in Federal Funds…you might have Romnesia.
14. If you think its okay for Romney to pay less percentage in taxes than you…you might have Romnesia.
15. If you really believe your children will be able to afford college without government assistance…you might have Romnesia.
16. If you believe that Global Warming is fuzzy science…you might have Romnesia.
17. If you think that the Romney you see on the TV and Campaign stump now is not an etch-o-sketch remake of the Romney from the primary trail….you might have Romnesia.
18. If you think Paul Ryan ran a marathon under 3 hours…you might have Romnesia.
19. If you believe that Romney/Ryan will not privatize Social Security…you might have Romnesia.
20. If you believe that a Republican Administration won’t dismantle all of the Middle Class benefits acquired from the New Deal to the Great Society, and throughout the past Democratic Administrations that include minimum wage, Forty –hour work week, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Pell Grants, Equal Pay, Right to Arbitrate, Fair Housing, Clean Air Act, Product Disclosure, Repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, and many many other pieces of legislation that have benefitted you and your families for decades…you don’t have Romnesia, you a serious problem in judging reality and I suggest you turn off FOX TV, get yourself to the nearest library and read.

Ah, the Smack Down On Long Island…doesn’t quite have the ring to it as say, The Thrilla in Manila, but none-the-less, whether the Romney camp is willing to admit it, their boy came back to the corner with a couple of black eyes. Obama decided he was taking off the gloves and going bare knuckles.

We have only a few weeks before the election and Romney is beginning to trip on all of the lies and positions he has taken over the last year-and-a-half. Let’s start with the “binder full of women” comment. Lest anyone think that his motives were not sincere, Romney did open up some key positions to women in Massachusetts when he was elected Governor, however, he didn’t go to them, a woman’s group came to him and suggested he hire more women. His staff realizing it would be good publicity agreed. (I do wonder if they got the same pay as a male would in the same job.) As in all things Romney, he twisted the facts to appear as though he initiated the action.

In this debate Romney nearly ripped of his mask of civility and revealed the face of the corporate raider he once was when with Bain Capital. His approach was rude and bordered on insulting. One can always be polite in disagreeing with someone else, especially if the one you are disagreeing with carries the title “President of the United States”. The Governor had probably been coached to aggressive, but there is a difference between aggressive and obnoxious. When discussing oil lease reductions on government land he didn’t simply say I disagree with you Mr. President, or your information is incorrect, he pushed and pushed with “What is it?” to a point of appearing like a bully in a school yard. Unfortunately for Romney, as in many of his other statements his information was incorrect. The reduction he was quoting in oil production was based upon figures derived from the moratorium sanctioned against deep water drilling after the BP blow-out in the Gulf. Drilling was shut down for several months until revised regulations could be designed to prevent another catastrophic event from occurring. When removed from the equation there was actually a net increase in actual drilling on government property. As a matter of fact under Obama, the U.S. has reduced foreign oil imports for the first time in over twenty years.
When confronted about his budget, Romney continued to dodge and weave not willing to discuss the details of how his tax cuts will be offset. There have been several independent studies that confirm the cuts he is proposing will add over 5 billion to the deficit and impact the Middle Class in a negative way. As Clinton said at the Democratic Convention, “The math doesn’t add up”.

Romney continued to lie about the administration’s recent cuts in Medicare. It has been proven that the 700 billion cut were not in the benefit side, but against waste in the provider side of the program and they were supported by Paul Ryan.

Romney thought he had the President in the corner and was about to hit him with a right cross when he got sucker punched by his own smart-alecky approach. So cock-sure of himself he even repeated that he wanted to; “make sure it was on the record” that Obama waited fourteen days to say the Libyan attacks on the Ambassador were a terrorist act. Obama simply said, “Read the transcript” and the moderator actually corrected the Governor to keep him from looking even more foolish than he did.

The Governor’s stance on women’s rights was laughable as well. While he claimed he believed women should have the right to use contraceptives and in the same breath he defended employers who would cut it from their insurance plans.

Romney spent the evening trying to have it both ways; he’s neither for nor against anything based upon where he is or who’s asking the question. The internet was alive after the debate with jokes about the “Binder full of Women” instead, it should be alive with the truth about Romney’s “Binder full of Bull”.

I’ve finally calmed down enough to write about the first Presidential debate. I was so angry during the debate I changed the channel and watched a rerun of International House Hunters. Why you ask. I was angry that Obama didn’t ‘balls-up’ and simply call Romney the liar he was. I was angry that the commentators afterwards failed to discount Romney’s performance as a pack of lies that have already been called by numerous sources. I get angry just writing about it now.

The president must understand that you cannot be civil with this group of people. One has to hold them down and drive a stake through their hearts.

Romney since his ‘stunning performance’ has been on a roll. He’s now claiming he won’t touch Medicare or Social Security. He won’t introduce anti-abortion legislation. He won’t repeal the immigration program that Obama instituted for the children of immigrants brought here by their parents. He’ll make sure that you can carry your child on your insurance for as long as you want. He won’t allow let insurance companies deny coverage for existing conditions. He will lower everybody’s taxes, increase defense spending, and still balance the budget.

WOW! It’s Super-Political Man! Romney has etcho-scketched himself one more time to be everything to everyone. Not conservative enough to beat the field of Republican’s running against him, nooooo problem. He can do that, he can be anti- abortion, anti-Health Care, and disassociate himself from his past policies. Ooops, too conservative and losing votes, whalla! He becomes a moderate again.

Anyone see a pattern here?

During the debate he lied about the 700 billion Obama cut from Medicare claiming it impacted the average person when the only thing it impacted were the medical PROVIDERS, (Fact Check).

He lied when he said twenty million people would lose their health coverage under the Affordable Health Care Act. (Fact Check) there may be a shifting of policy coverage but no one will lose their coverage.

He lied when he said his plan would allow for everyone with pre-existing conditions to get coverage. His plan would ONLY apply to those who are already in long term plans for that kind of coverage. (Fact Check)

He lied when he said 42% of the economy is spent on the Government like Spain. The actual number is 23%. (Fact Check).

He lied when he said that health care costs have gone up by $2,500 per family, it has gone up by $1,300. (Fact Check).

He lied when he claimed that oil and gas leases on government lands has been cut by 50%. The number is between 20 and 30%. (Fact Check)

Mitch Romney is a liar.

I do not know why Obama did not call Romney on his fabrications. Maybe Obama is too much of a nice guy to be President. Maybe one has to be a liar to get into office and stay there. It was Hitler who said; “In the size of the lie is always contained a certain factor of credulity, since the great masses of people…will more easily fall victims to a great lie than to a small one.”

He also said; “tell a big enough lie often enough and people will believe it.”

The new and improved Romney is still what he’s always been…a liar.

In the sixties there was a Television Program called; “What’s My Line?” A panel of celebrities tried to guess the profession of the guest contestants by asking a series of questions within a designated time frame. That’s what’s been happening with respect to Governor Romney. As the election looms in the future, like a the contestant who is trying to hide his true self, the press have had to painfully attempt to define Romney with each day of events, questions, or his own remarks. His latest foot-in-the-mouth reveals a little more about what he believes of the American Public.

He gave us a little insight when he was questioned after his address to the NAACP convention when he said that “there would be no more free stuff for those people”. Now in a clandestine closed door fund raiser he noted: “…there are 47 percent who are with him, [Obama], who are dependent on government, who believe they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it. That’s an entitlement. And [they think] the government should give it to them.”

Of course once the statement was ‘leaked’ he has apologized for the comment as “not elegantly stated” but has said he will not back down from his remarks. So, another piece of the mask is removed from the Romney image, and this one is a bit scary. Much like the no free stuff comment stereotyped members of the NAACP, Romney has now characterized a complete section of the country that may depend upon the services that a responsible government should provide as a collection of free-loaders.

Romney may have had to eat some tuna and mac casseroles in college, but he always had the reassurance that daddy who owned American motors was a phone call away to help if he needed some financial assistance. Many Americans, those in that 47% don’t have such a resource. They depend upon assisted housing programs to get them out of a slum or provide a roof over their heads. They may need food stamps when between minimum paying jobs at MacDonald’s. Many college students wouldn’t be receiving higher education without government grants. The cost of healthcare would be even higher if hospital emergency rooms were choked with those who currently receive Medicaid. School and elderly food programs that assure students get at least one real meal per day or the disabled or shut-in have something to eat would cease and they would go hungry without the government programs that provide that food. What of our veterans? Many of them would not have medical attention without the services paid for by the government through V.A. Hospitals, or housing. Many people with mentally handicapped family members on fixed incomes could not provide a decent home environment without the government programs that provide aid for in-home care. Medicare provides hundreds of thousands with decent health care. Unemployment benefits have kept thousands, if not millions, of our citizens whole until the economy could provide them with a new job.

The “entitlements” that Romney refers to has touched the lives of millions of Americans at one time or another. Many of them have worked hard all of their lives and may have had their retirement wiped-out by the gambles investment banking caused, or their companies went bankrupt through speculation or takeover to be left without a job late in life.  Others may have had a personal tragedy where medical bills forced them into bankruptcy.

Never has there been a clearer picture into the mind and beliefs of Mitch Romney. He paints all those in need with the same broad brushstroke he reserves for those who he feels want “free stuff”. It is appalling that he is so out of touch with the vastness of what is America. It is appalling that he fails to recognize not only the responsibilities that government has to its citizens, but that he condemns that responsibility. It is appalling that he fails to understand that Americans are not asking for a handout, but a hand up. And it is appalling that he has the audacity to make these comments behind closed doors appealing  to donors he feels may think the same way and not until his comments are ‘leaked’ that he confronts his remarks.

What’s Mitch Romney’s line?  He’s a businessman. He is insensitive to those in need. He believes in the Almighty Dollar. He is so far removed from the average American they are but a punch line in his campaign rhetoric. He believes that government is here to help business and if you can’t make it on your own, well tough, don’t count on a Romney Administration to help.

As Dandy Don Merideth used to sing; “The party’s over turn out the lights”, so goes the end to the RNC and DNC’s moment in the sun. The hoopla is over for both of the National Parties and it’s time to go on the ‘road show’.

Both the Republicans and Democrats used the stage to rally their base as well as throw a few darts at each other. The Republicans were called for outright lying, the Dems for stretching the truth.

In a post analysis world where the media spends its time focusing on potential reaction, a few words of speakers, moving moments on the platform, a lot tends to get lost in the humdrum rhetoric.

As I have stated in my past articles, this is an important election for the simple fact it will define America. This was the theme of President Obama’s speech last night. The speakers leading up to the President’s moment on stage all set the focus on what had been achieved and what the Democratic Party has stood for and will stand for going forward. They spent their time as well refuting the Republican Party’s claims and identifying blatant falsehoods presented at the RNC party.

While the President made a compelling speech about what was required of the ‘Citizenry’ in a Republic and the responsibility we have to each other, he failed to call attention to the remedy needed to assure that representatives of the people were in place to institute those requirements. While a President can be the symbol of the better Republic, and initiate legislation to strengthen values represented, he cannot move forward unless those behind him are willing to work with him to validate such a course of action.

Whether you believe in the positions of the Republicans or Democrats, a Congress and Senate that is unwilling to compromise, seek the better good will continue to be dysfunctional and as a result place the country in another quagmire of finger-pointing for at least two years. That is what’s been going on since the mid-term elections in 2010. The far-right of the Republican Party kidnapped the House of Representatives and 185 delegates out of 435 have caused gridlock. Grover Norquist, who is not even an elected official, is holding the rest of the Republicans hostage because he sits on a pile of money that he directs against those in his party that fail to tow his line. He has driven any legislator out of office who just might consider compromising to get passage of bills that may positively impact the economy or Obama’s image. He’s filled seats with lemmings that cite his view and have brought the recovery to a standstill. The new Republican Party would keep two million people unemployed in order to get one man out of office.

In the last two years 17 bills that would have assisted in continuing our economic recovery were held up in Committee or defeated in the House. Additionally, the Republicans led the boycott on the debt ceiling increase (something they had approved under G.W. Bush for eight consecutive years), which led to a lowering of the U.S. Bond rating for the first time in our history.

So it breaks down to what you personally want for our country. If you believe in the policies that were initiated during the George W. Bush years, where the upper 10% of the country saw growth in their incomes while the remaining 90% stayed stagnant, then vote for Romney/Ryan. If you believe it was okay for a war to be conducted for that entire period without financial backing as taxes were lowered and an additional debt of nearly 4 trillion was added to our Country’s burden, then vote for Romney/Ryan. If you think it is okay to allow banks and traders to gamble with investors’ money without regulations, or if banks can add charges indiscriminately on your loans and credit cards or give money to those unable to afford a mortgage, vote for Romney/Ryan. If you think it is fine to cut health services to the poorest of our Republic, or to limit payments to future Medicare recipients, vote for Romney/Ryan. If you think it is fine to cut funds from education, dismantle environmental laws, or open our country to job loss through outsourcing, vote for Romney /Ryan.

If not, then don’t just vote for Obama/Biden, vote for every Democrat that’s running because without the Congress behind them we’ll just have the same thing. It’s your choice.

A close friend of mine said he was going to vote a straight Republican ticket because he wants return to the American values that he grew up with. That made me think, just what are the American values that the Republicans keep saying they will return us to? Now my friend is an intelligent hard working guy, who came from humble beginnings, his parents were Italian immigrants and they had to work for everything they got in life.  They moved here in the 1950’s when the U.S. economy was growing and America was continuing to expand with an interstate highway system, new public schools, and the country was at peace.

I grew up in the Fifties as well and it was a great time. There seemed to be far fewer problems than now. Mom stayed at home and took care of the kids, dad worked long hours but we always had food on the table and a roof over our heads. We managed an occasional trip to the beach. We were not wealthy, but we were not desperate either, and though by the time I hit my third year of high school and had to work summers to pay for my tuition, I was unaware of the sacrifices my parents were making to provide their children with a secure life.  As I moved toward college I began realizing things, dad and mom never got their teeth worked on, but all of the kids did. The beef pot roast on Sunday was the same meat in the hash for Thursday. Dad and mom took four hours to grocery shop each week as they went to five different stores to buy only the “bargains’.  Mom’s winter coat was the same one she had when I was eight, and dad’s only suit seemed to be styled after those Harry Truman wore in the forties. When my grandmother had a stroke and could no longer speak or walk mom took care of her converting the dining room to a bedroom and dad could get rid of his 20 year old Plymouth and use the car grandma won in a Catholic Church raffle.  When my dad fell ill to Gideon Beret he received treatment from his Veteran’s benefits at the local V.A. hospital and then later he was allowed dignity in death because of Medicare. Through of it, dad and mom gave to the church, volunteered to help those poorer than we, made sure that we understood we were loved and better off than “most”. They made sure we knew that we had a responsibility to work hard and better ourselves and those around us, and that all people should be treated with dignity. Those were the “American Values” my folks taught to me and I’m sure they were very much like those taught to my friend and many others of our generation.

In my last years in high school I began seeing a different part of the American system that opened my eyes a bit further to “American Values”. When trying to have lunch with a friend of mine at the downtown Woolworth’s I was told that I would be served but he could not because he was a “Negro”.

Until then I never really had given much thought to his race. When we were younger we would spend summers in my Aunt’s corner grocery store in the Third Ward of Houston and all of my friends were “Negroes”. Now it hit me that somehow he was not considered equal with me. That applied to a lot of the teammates I had on the sandlot baseball team as well, they were all “Mexicans”.

I volunteered for a few organizations and saw the poverty that I had not seen when playing stick ball in the Third Ward. How many people, though working hard, went to bed hungry each night. I saw schools where children, barely clothed for the weather had no lunches, some with no shoes. I saw the elderly who had no medical attention. I went to “Negro” Baptist Churches and watched the people rejoice in God and went to many Sunday gatherings. I saw they had the same “American Values” of love and hard work that my parents had taught to me. The difference was these citizens according to the overall “American Value” system were considered less than I. They had schools where teachers were poorly trained, where school supplies were not available, where lunches were not provided.

As I continued to work in business, I saw “American Values” that allowed employers to abuse their employees, work them long hours without overtime, or dismiss someone because they did not agree with the boss. I saw women continue to receive lesser wages for the same job I was doing, or bosses who wanted a “little favor” from them for more pay.

In college and afterwards, I was exposed to a wider variety of Americans, through my job, (I had worked at a hotel since my junior year of high school). I met International travelers as well as Americans from all stations of life. The “American Values” I saw there were different as well.  I learned that until 1964 not everyone could vote. That there was a poll tax to cast your ballot, and one had to pass mandatory comprehensive test if they were African Americans. I learned that Asians wanting to immigrate to the U.S. were prohibited while Western Europeans were permitted. I learned that medical attention was not available for the poor and elderly until 1965 when something called Medicare and Medicaid had been established. I learned that cigarettes were really bad for me because all of a sudden the package in which they came were required to come with labels warning me of the health risk. Because of what the Republicans would call, government ‘interference’,  I found out what was in my food, my water, and what lead paint and asbestos could do to me.  My vacations got better and safer and I went to several National Reserves where developers were prohibited and saw my first eagle, and drove there in a car that was required to be manufactured with a higher level of safety considerations. I saw the beaches and bays get cleaned up as the same government interference instituted clean air and water laws.

In my adult life I saw my American Values embrace the diversity of a nation that grew from 150 million people in the Fifties to over 350 million now. These values allowed for lack of discrimination because of race, religion, and gender. They encompassed the right for all to be entitled to live where they choose, be sure there is no discrimination on gender  in the workplace, to know that hate crimes are not permitted. That safety requirements in mining were required and forest restoration in the lumber regions of our country. That if you are a woman you have a natural right over your own body. That there can be no pay discrimination based upon gender, race, color, or national origin. That if you are disabled you are entitled to the same access to a building as someone who is not.  That if you are blind the building you work in accommodates your assistance dog and the elevator lets you know what floor you’re on. That if you are gay, you can still fight in the Army in defense of our freedom. That our prisoners can’t be tortured. That lending institutions are required to disclose all fees that impact you.

I know it seems like life has gotten more complicated than that which it was when I was a child, but maybe it’s only now that our American Values apply to all of those I did not see when I was younger. I believe our values are better because of they do.

The Republican Party this week has been showcasing its “Vision” of a New America. That their party will return to the values of old; “American Values”. I hope those values include the needs of All Americans and not just those I saw as a child.

The Press and Television Commentators seem to be making an issue of the rhetoric in the presidential race rather than addressing what is being said. While the attacks on both sides are becoming rather ‘direct’, one should not lose focus on the substance of the conversations. A diversion which directs the public from truthful accusations to the manner in which the statements are brought forth is a disservice to that public. The media should be asking the question; “What is the truth in the statements being made?” rather than: “What is a better way of making the statement?”

While there is a bit of stretching of the facts on both sides, the effrontery of Republican reaction to Obama’s attacks is truly incredulous. For Romney’s camp to claim foul is as Dan Rather might say, “like the fox complaining to the farmer he doesn’t have enough chickens for him to eat”. The Republican, party through their various instruments of “truth”, have been relentless at putting forth half-truths, innuendos, and accusing the President of everything to the left of Lenin. Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Shawn Hanratty and the collection of couch bobble heads at FOX have crossed the line on civility in their comments about the President more times one can shake the proverbial stick at, and as in Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh’s  rhetoric have often come close to calling for anarchy. For them and the rest of the R’s to complain when Obama and Company actually tell the truth about the aspirations of the conservative branch of the Republican Party is shameless. Now that would be a story the mainstream media should cover.

To say that this has become the “dirtiest race ever” is malarkey.  Remember the Kerry race against Bush II and the Swift Boat ads? Remember the Willie Horton ads against Dukakis? Anyone remember who Lee Atwater was? The Republican Party has written the book on dirty politics since 1968 and has only refined their approach since. Now they claim foul when the Democrats have the cojones to do the same thing.

This is an election about the values of our country. Do we choose a path that is compassionate and responsible for all of our citizens? One where the wealthiest country in the world provides for the basic dignity and well-being of our people? A path that assures the environment will be intact for our grandchildren?  Do we make sure the elderly have proper medical care and assistance through Social Security to have the necessary funds to eat? Do we make sure future generations can obtain a higher education at less than usury rates? Will the values of our country reflect the understanding that with great wealth comes a greater responsibility to assist others?

Or will we follow a path expressed by Paul Ryan from the writings of Ayn Rand where collectivism is a failure and it is the individual that counts? The philosophy of; “I have mine”. One where the poor have a safety net don’t they? One where Medicare becomes an instrument of big insurance companies and higher co-pays. One where Social Security becomes an instrument of individual mutual fund managers with high fees. One where the banks and Wall Street brokers trade with impunity risking savings and institutional funds for potential short-term gains.

This is what is being said in the accusations put forth by Obama. This is what the media should cover. These are the issues.

In the selection of Representative Paul Ryan as his running mate, Mitt Romney has turned the corner on his past and set the course for his future. Romney, a conservative who understood the need to work with both sides of the isle when Governor, has now compromised his principles, moving to the far right. This is the message he has sent to the Tea Party activists that have taken a stranglehold on the Grand Old Party.

Paul Ryan represents the group of legislators who refuse to compromise and work with all factions of Congress. It’s either his way or the highway. His is the belief of one. His positions have no concern for the entire populous, only how he interprets them and their needs. This was dramatically seen when he led the fight to prevent the debt ceiling from being increased, (although he voted for it when under G.W. Bush), and plunged the markets and the economy into a stagnation that took several months to bring it back into growth. His stand cost thousands of investors to lose investments as the markets dropped hundreds of points until a deal was designed. But, it served Ryan's purpose. It set back the slow recovery that was taking place and in doing so gave the GOP a card against Obama.

The Republican Party has made no secret of its agenda since the mid-term elections. Their number one goal openly expressed by Mitch McConnell is to remove Obama and they have worked to thwart every program and any action that would continue to stimulate the economy for fear it would lead to his re-election. Paul Ryan is one of the leaders of this fight.

I digress into a history lesson. Before Lyndon Johnson was President he served in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. In both positions, he was known to work for compromise and the common good. When a minority leader in the Senate he made the statement; “There are two courses open to a minority party, it can indulge in the politics of partisanship, or it can remain true to the politics of responsibility.” Johnson, the man who led the Great Society campaign that gave us the Civil Rights Act, Medicare, and several other programs that enhanced the life of every middle class American, also had to hold in line the far left Democrats of the time who demanded a more liberal agenda that Johnson recognized as unobtainable and/or harmful to the economic health of the Country.

When the Democrats took control of the Senate and he became majority leader, he held firm on his beliefs of compromise and responsibility to all Americans and worked hand in hand with President Eisenhower to pass effective legislation regardless of the benefit it might give to the Republican President in the polls.

This is not the way of Paul Ryan. (Check out Paul Ryan's voting record at www.ontheissues.com) Sadly Governor Romney is aligning himself with the "policies of partisanship" versus those of "responsibility".  He has thrown away the etch-o-sketch to land in place of small-minded people with limited vision and where compromise is dirty word.

Good grief. Like a bad movie episode of Halloween XXV where Michael comes back one more time to scare the hell of you, Dick Cheney keeps showing up to stab at Obama each week. Unfortunately we’ll probably be forced to watch this appearance through November as the only value that the Romney camp has for him is to take blind pot shots at the administration or offset gaffs by the Republicans in general.

Last week he mentioned that Sarah Palin was a bad choice for V.P. It was an obvious attempt to offset Senator John McCain’s earlier comments that Palin was a better VP choice than Romney. This week he’s stating that two years of tax returns is enough for Romney to reveal. Cheney has enough worth to do this yap dog task but doesn’t have enough value to wrangle an invitation to the Convention in August. He’s going “fishing”. Nor is his puppet been asked to the dance either as George W. Bush, the current leader of the party, is being left on the sidelines as well.

The question that has been asked but everyone knows the answer to is why? Why would not the President and Vice President who lead the Republicans through eight years be excluded from the pomp and circumstance that showcases the Republican vision of the future? The Romney camp would have you believe that it is by their own choice and there are conflicts in their schedules preventing them from appearing. The pundits say it’s because they are too moderate for the new Republican base.

It could also be because these two along with the rest of the ”W” cast will remind the public that they presided over a war that was unnecessary, lied about WMDs and the nuclear capability of Iraq, failed to pay for the conflict, lowered taxes on the rich drove up the National debt by nearly three trillion dollars, let Wall Street and the banking industry run amouck and almost collapse, reversed programs on global warming, ignored the catastrophe that happened after Katrina, and left office on a rise in unemployment to 9% leaving a mess for Obama to handle.

So what do you do with two has-beens that you know their presence will stir memories in the public reminding them that the good old days were not so good? You let George W. quietly retire to the ranch in Cameron, and pull out the bull dog to make the sniping attacks he has always been so good at. The far right still loves him, it’s the folks in the middle that recognize him for the scoundrel that he is. So keep him shoring up the right, but don’t give him center stage at the “show” because he might rip off his face to show the venomous creature he has always been.

The aggravation is that the Press keeps giving him space and coverage.  Until they recognize his voice is as irrelevant as a noise in the desert, he’ll continue to come back to assault us all.

I am about to really upset a lot of people, but I can’t help it. As a born Catholic who left his Church in search of spiritual answers I could not divine there and dabbled in various religions until I decided after many years that maybe there was substance in my original religion, I have to open Pandora’s Box and delve a little into the religion of Joseph Smith. Now this is something the Obama camp will condemn, along with many other pundits who believe a man’s religion is off limits, but we’re about to consider putting a man in the Office of President who believes that God chose Joseph Smith to reveal the new order of religion to the world and translated the lost teachings of the Lord that had been buried in America around 400 A.D. and only he could understand the Tablets of Gold.
Now when I came back to Catholicism, I patched together a path that allowed me a way to dismiss many of the less sane “traditions” and “beliefs” through something that the Church calls the “Right of Dissent”. Basically, this enables me to disagree while remaining a Catholic as the Church recognizes that it is I who will be standing alone on Judgment Day and stating that what I did was what I sincerely believed with all of my heart. Mormons don’t have such a safety clause. They are taught to believe everything they are told and told not to question what they believe.

I bring this up since I believe that people are a product of their environment and backgrounds. In the course of one’s life, one develops, questions, chooses to believe, disregards, expands, shrinks and becomes that which they are.  The Age of Enlightenment for one’s self. There’s nothing wrong with those people who find comfort in drinking the whole glass of Kool-Aid of the theologies of their religion, I just don’t want to live next door to any of them. Catholics who believed that they were all going to hell because they ate meat on Fridays had a rude awakening when John the XXIII changed the rules.

Whether you believe or not that Christ was the promised Messiah of Judaism, his existence has been documented, and his life of sacrifice and his teachings of charity and peace are an example by which all can be inspired. One must admit, “Love your neighbor as yourself” if followed would make this a pretty damn good world.  Still what drove me from the fold were the inexorable actions of the Ministers of Christ’s words which led to the slaughter of millions throughout the centuries as well as the hypocrisy they have exhibited whereby countless people have been abused and shunned. What led me back was I realized that these actions were those of men and not the theology of the Church.

Now let’s stand back and take a look at the Church of Joseph Smith. This is a religion and that is founded around 1829 on the belief that the Angel Moroni appeared to Joseph Smith and gave him the lost golden tablets of the Nephites of America (no traces of the tribe of Nephites has ever been uncovered in America or anywhere else), of course the golden plates were given back to the angel so they could never be seen by anyone else, (unlike the stone tablets brought down from the Mountain by Moses and carried in the desert for 40 years). Now the witness for this celestial visit was a one, Oliver Cowdery, who was a known counterfeiter who pawned off worthless Bank of Monroe currency to hundreds of unsuspecting people. (He happened to fall out with Smith and crawfished on his baptism in the Church until he was penniless 17 years later and returned so he could be taken care of.)

Smith himself was a known “Glasslooker”, someone who purported the ability to uncover buried treasure by looking through stones for which he was paid $14 per month plus room and board. He was arrested in 1827 for his practice but was only given a warning since those who were the defendants in the case refused to testify that they had been conned. Finding treasure was done with a seerstone, the very type of stones Smith claimed to use to translate the golden tablets. So goes the foundations of Smith’s Church.
Now without boring everyone with the long strenuous growth of the Church of Mormon, everything from polygamy to the martyrdom of Smith and the machinations  of Brigham Young, suffice it to say that Smith’s Church was founded by a couple of con artists that had a less than sterling past.

Besides all of that one needs to look at the doctrines of Mormonism in the period that would have influenced our potential president. Mitt is 65 so he would have been a missionary under the 1948 until 1978 teachings of Mormonism which included the “Curse of Cain Doctrine”, that “Negroes are cursed and inferior and the children of Cain less valiant in the War in Heaven”, (a doctrine of which Church has not issued written repudiation. As a matter of fact it wasn’t until 1978 when it was discovered that 65% of the Mormon priesthood in Brazil had African ancestry and the U.S. Government threatened the church’s tax exempt status if they continued to violate the civil rights of their members that the church changed their position.)
Additionally Mormon men were told that they will have the right to resurrect their wives in the resurrection and that if the wives has been disobedient to the husband they may leave them in their graves for all eternity. As late as 1966 the LDS leader Bruce R. McConkie wrote that “A woman’s primary place is in the home, where she is to rear her children and abide by the religious counsel of her husband”. In the Church’s Proclamation to the World in 1978 it was again expressed; “Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children”.

There are numerous other references that relate to the teachings and doctrine of the Mormon Church that impact the daily behavior of those who are required to follow its laws. Unfortunately it is a little difficult to find any actual published “doctrine” since in 2010 McConkie’s book of Mormon Doctrine was pulled from the bookshelves and ceased publication. The book was written in 1958 and served as the reference book for members of the Church for over 50 years. (It went through three editions and was generally the book used by converts to reference the teaching of the Church.)

Mormons believe that the Mormon faith is Christ’s Church restored with its original authority, maintaining that existing denominations believed incorrect doctrines and were not acknowledged by God. They hold that the true faith was restored in upstate New York by Joseph Smith and that the Garden of Eden and location of the Second Coming will be in the state of Missouri.

Now what has this got to do with Governor Romney? Well, here’s the rub, Romney as a practicing Mormon was not only a member, but as required, a missionary and he was also a Bishop of the Church. This means he had to believe and preach all of the doctrine of the Mormon religion. Failure to do so would lead to his excommunication. This includes the Church’s stance (until 1978) on those of African ancestry, and as it exists today, on the role of women.

His religious beliefs have not always translated into community action however, since when Governor in his first year he was more moderate than conservative. That changed however by year three when his stance on pro-choice moved to that of anti-abortion (opposite of his campaign rhetoric) and he vetoed a bill on pro-life grounds that would expand access to emergency contraception in hospitals and pharmacies. He cut education funding but supported vouchers for charter (private) schools and home schooling programs. Property taxes within the State also rose from 49% to 53% as a result of his cuts of State funds to the local municipalities.

His popularity slipped as well from 61% in the first year to 34% in his last year, ranking him 48th out of 50 governors.

Now he’s running for President, and while he has not necessarily worn his faith on his sleeve, Mitt has deep-rooted beliefs that peek out every now and then. A good example is what happened at the recent appearance before the NAACP Convention in Houston. When asked about the fact he was booed, he said he expected it. So if he was not going to seek converts from the conventioneers, why go? Maybe because he could send the message that he stood up to the NAACP and told them; and I quote; “the free stuff” was over. Does that sound a bit racist?  Could it relate back to the old attacks of “Welfare moms”? Maybe.

Much like Mormonism, Romney is an enigma hidden in the shadows. He won’t reveal his taxes. (Does everyone know about his stent with Marriott as head of the Finance Committee when they were fined by the IRS for tax shelter issues to the tune of 29 million?) He won’t come clean about his post 1999 days with Bain Capital. Does everyone know the reason his great grandfather immigrated to Mexico was to keep his five wives and avoid bigamy charges in the U.S.? If everything about Obama is fair game by the hard right of the Republican Party then it is fair to ask how the influence of the teachings of Joseph Smith’s Mormon Church influenced Mitt in his approach to the rest of society.

Does he really believe that an Angel named Moroni gave a N.Y. con artist named Joseph Smith Golden Tablets hidden in North America since 400 A.D.? Does he believe all other Christian religions have been teaching falsehoods as professed by the Mormons? Did he really believe during his first 38 years as a Mormon that Africans were children of the “Curse of Cain”?  Does he think that men can keep disobedient wives in their graves for eternity? Does he think a woman’s primary place is in the home?

Did he drink the entire glass of Kool-Aid or just a few sips?

People are making a lot of fuss about the call by President Obama’s camp for Governor Romney to disclose his tax returns. However if you go back to the race for the Republican nomination this is exactly what all of Romney’s opponents were calling for, so what’s the difference now? Oh yes, the Democrats are asking for them.

After much ado, lamentations, and twisting in the wind, Romney coughed up his 2010  tax returns and plans on putting out those for 2011. He refuses to release any more. No big deal…or is it? Romney seems to be running from his wealth and the question is why? If the American dream is to make it big, live the life, and be successful, why shy away from the success you have achieved? Unless those tax returns contradict his statements about the shelters he’s taken in off shore accounts and investments in foreign businesses. Those investments would not be illegal; however, if you are a candidate running on integrity and accusing your opponent of being dishonest and being an un-American, then you certainly don’t want information made public that would destroy the image you’ve established for yourself. 

If you are not investing in America as you claim, (he made the statement 99.5% of his investments are in American companies), if your wealth is greater than you have stated (he made the statement that he only earns around $375,000 annually from his speaking engagements, but never alluded as to what his income from offshore  investments might be), and the taxes you pay are a personification of the disparity between the upper 1% and the rest of the country, then those tax returns will certainly paint a picture you would prefer to remain hidden.

The problem with the Governor is that he’s not being forthright with the voters. He appears to be hiding information that could depict an image of immense wealth. The thing is there’s nothing wrong with being wealthy. There is something wrong with pretending you are not. Mr. Romney should be prepared to be open to the public scrutiny of how and where he makes his fortune

He wants us to take him on his word, but much like the smoke screen he laid down when asked whether or not he was in charge of Bain Capital from 1999 until 2002, Romney’s tax evasion is an avoidance of responsibility for his own actions. When asked about his affiliation with Bain when running for Governor of Massachusetts he said: “There were a number of social trips and business trips that brought me back to Massachusetts, Board Meetings…I returned for most of those meetings, others I attended by telephone when I could not make them personally.”  This is a total contradiction to his most recent interviews where he said he had nothing to do with Bain’s business decisions and did not partake in any meetings even by telephone. For the part time services he did not discharge he earned $100,000 per year.

Now maybe he’s telling the truth. Maybe Bain paid him $100k per year for keeping his name on the letterhead. But either he participated in the meetings and calls or he did not. Was he misrepresenting himself back when he campaigned for Governor…or now?

Further he claims all of Bain’s job creation throughout his 25 year employment which would include the years 1999 through 2002, but if he wasn’t a part of the decisions, how can he claim their successes? He can’t have it both ways.

This is the underlying image that has plagued Mitt Romney from the beginning. It is an honesty issue. Do we believe what he wants us to see or the actual facts that are peeking out from under his statements? The tax returns would go a long way in painting a truer picture of the Governor.  He should release them.

Being a native Texan I am quite familiar with the history of the State that depicts Travis’ famous challenge to his beleaguered force of Patriots where he drew a line in the sand at the Alamo and asked those who wished to stay to cross over it. While there is many a historian that discredits the account, the essence of the depiction is that a badly outnumbered force of men decided to stay and fight to the death rather than surrender to tyranny.

Governor Perry seems to have confused this act of valor for independence with one that paints his State into an indefensible corner and will result in the loss of life to many of its citizens. He has drawn another line in the sand and is challenging the State Congress to cross over it and support an action that will deny health coverage to many of the poorest members of Texas.

The Affordable Healthcare Act which is so warmly referred to as “Obamacare” provides extended coverage to the poorest section of our citizens through extended Medicaid and sets up a pool of insurance subsidized by the Federal Government where those who have high risk pre-existing conditions can buy insurance at a lower rate rather than that which would normally cost them as much as forty percent of their monthly income. The cost to the State to implement this program is nothing, zilch, nadda. Perry who more than once has casually talked about secession, views this action as interference in States Rights and as such as an attack upon our beloved Texas. Therefore he is refusing to implement a Federal Government program that has nothing but positive results for Texans other than it wasn’t designed in Texas and one he has blindly opposed regardless of the benefits.

It is now up to the State Legislature to overturn this decision and refuse to cross the line in the sand that Perry has drawn. Unfortunately unlike the heroes of the Alamo that helped give this State its liberty, the current collection of Senators and Congressmen meeting in Austin have a remarkable resemblance to a pack of lemmings and will probably blindly follow Perry over the cliff of stupidity.

The Affordable Healthcare Act, while not perfect, has many benefits; the ability to carry our children on our policies until they are twenty-six and can afford their own, the ability to not have insurance companies deny coverage at our place of employment because of pre-existing conditions, insurance rate regulations, the creation of jobs in the insurance and health fields, and of course the extension of benefits to those who are the poorest in our society removing the cost of their coverage and burden from our State’s emergency rooms and hospitals. Of course it’s a Federal Program and therein lies the rub. Instead of accepting the assistance of the Federal Government, of which whether he likes it or not Texas is a member, he’d rather put up a senseless fight that will literally put the lives of thousands of Texans at risk.
The Affordable Healthcare Act is not an attack on Texas. It is a relief force coming to the aid of the State’s neediest people with no price tag attached. It is time the representatives of the State draw their own line in the sand and ask the Governor to cross over it for the sake of its citizens.

Now that the dust has cleared from the John Roberts bombshell, the Tea Party and their in-tow Republican neocons are foaming at the mouth like a bunch of school kids who were called out at the plate by the umpire that was supposed to be their friend.
They exhibit exactly what’s wrong with the Republican party of today. They have forgotten what the purpose for which the Supreme Court was established. It was not meant to be a political establishment, where the party in power parks people who will defend only their positions. It was established to be the check-and-balance between the other branches of government. With the exception of Scalia, and Thomas, it appears Supreme Court Chief Justice Robert’s gets it.

His comment was that he is not here to rewrite the law, but to make sure the law can be enforced and is constitutional. In his ruling, while he agreed with the failure of the government to make a case for the Commerce clause, in that it imposes a tax penalty for those who fail to comply with the law, therefore it can be interpreted as a tax and is constitutional.

For his upholding of the requirements of his office, he is now being skewered by the very party that supported his nomination.
Once again the Republican Party acts in the most selfish vacuum imaginable. “How can this happen? He’s our man!” For all of those people who are boohooing States’ Rights, they should look back to the 2000 election and how the Republican Court trampled all over Florida’s rights. It was then, that Chief Justice Rehnquist led the court to a decision that violated the most basic of States Rights when they over-rode Florida’s ability to conduct its own recount for as long as necessary. This decision gave George W. Bush the election. Roberts on the other-hand understands that the law is the law and whether he likes it or not, his office required an examination of the entire law and how it could meet the constitutional question.

Now as for Romney and his candidacy’s rallying call to repeal the law with a new Congress, one should listen to what he said yesterday. He would repeal the Obamacare and in its place put a program that assures people can keep their current insurance (the current law does not require employers to change policies unless they so choose). He would make sure the States can offer affordable health care to all, (the current law creates a pool of subsidized choices that enables people to buy care at affordable prices). He would insure that existing conditions would not be denied, (the current law calls for this).  He would however eliminate the mandate requiring that all persons have insurance. This is the mechanism that actually brings down the cost of the entire program in that the pool of existing participants would now include the healthier citizens who to date refuse to get coverage.
It should be noted here, that the program Romney is objecting to is modeled after the one he passed when Governor of and one that is working well for that State.
The current law addresses several issues:

• It eliminates discrimination in policy allowing for previously high-risk people to get insurance for pre-existing conditions.
• It allows parents to cover their children up to the age of 26 on their policy making the burden less for those entering the marketplace as well as reducing the cost to the employer to have to cover the younger worker.
• It creates a subsidized pool of insurance carriers for those without insurance to obtain coverage. The monies going to the States will also stimulate jobs creation in the health insurance field as well as the medical field. This should offset any losses of ‘permanent’ workers that companies may reduce to fall below the 50 employee requirement for coverage.
• It creates a tax credit for those small business who will be required to carry insurance for their employees offsetting a portion of the cost.
• It will reduce the Federal Deficit. The CBO has determined that once all the revenue streams are factored in the law reduces the deficit by @210 billion over the years of 2012-2020.

Lastly, while it is not the perfect program, those who complain about government controlled health care should stand back and decide if they would voluntarily like to withdraw from Medicare. All of us have friends and relatives that rely on this GOVERNMENT service. Medicare represents over 24% of the national budget. While it needs revisiting in application, without it, many, many, people would have died. If the Tea Party is so opposed to a government run health program, then stop using Medicare. If the Republican Party is opposed to a government run mandate for health care then stop hiding behind the veil of reform and simply state they would repeal Medicare as well.

What Chief Justice Roberts did was to say that Congress passed a constitutional law. If they want to repeal it, then repeal it. It is not the the job of the Court to do so.

For those of you who missed the Senate Banking Committee that brought Jamie Dimon, CEO of JP Morgan Chase in for questioning, be happy. It was the single most blatant example of partisan baloney displayed in the Senate Chambers since the era of McCarthyism.

Mr. Dimon was allegedly brought in to be questioned by the panel as to the 2.6 billion dollar loss that JPMorgan Chase incurred from a “Bad Gamble” of investor monies. The problem was that the biggest contributor to the campaign funds of the Senators on the Banking Committee that were doing the questioning just happened to be JPMorgan Chase.

Instead of asking why JPMorgan Chase was gambling with investor’s money on risky investments three Republican Senators spent most of the time in awe of Mr. Dimon, complimenting him on his abilities. The three particular Senators who were: Mike Crapo of Idaho, Bob Corker of Tennessee, and Jim DeMint of South Carolina.

Each of these Senators did their best to compliment and coddle Mr. Dimon.  Senator DeMint went so far as to say that the Senate “…has no right to criticize JPMorgan Chase on the 2 billion dollar loss as we in the Senate lose 2 billion every day”. Obviously he compares legislation that stimulates the economy, pays for defense, provides education, and health coverage or Social Security to be akin to gambling on bad investments with no return for the money. One must ask; "How did you ever get into office Senator?"

Senator Corker went out of his way to find fault with the Dodd/Frank Bill that regulates the banking industry. It was Corker who stripped the Dodd/Frank bill of some of the stronger provisions that would have prevented the actions that allowed JPMorgan Chase to lose the 2.6 billion. It is also Corker who has said he would block any revisions to strengthen the Dodd/Frank bill.

The hypocrisy of the hearing is an example of the current sickness that has infected the Republican Party.  There is no desire to change those policies that were enacted under the Republican controlled Congress of the Bush years that led to the economic crises of 2008-09. The Senate, which is supposed to be the ‘higher’ house, designed by the Forefathers as a quorum that should remove emotion and bickering from the formation of law enabling open conversation and allowing compromise for legislation to the betterment of all citizens, has become a den of thieves, where policy is set by those who pay the most to those who speak in their behalf.

Yesterday’s hearing confirms the path that America will take if it returns to the policies promoted by the past. Policies Mr. Romney and the Republicans preach from the campaign trail. The Bankers and Investors will return to programs that enable unrestricted movement of monies into high risk opportunities without regulation where failure will be paid by the people of America.

The prophets of the Republican Party will continue to scream that government regulation stymies growth when in fact it protects our citizens from the greed that is endemic to capitalism. One of the first lessons in the school of business is that it has no obligation other than to make money. Uncontrolled and unregulated Capitalism was recognized as having the ability to eat its own young by the likes of Theodore Roosevelt, and later Franklin Roosevelt.  Restrained and controlled it is a vital mechanism for the development of a free society.

The Senate Banking Committee in their actions yesterday in essence gave a “Senatus Consultum” or Senate decree congratulating Mr. Dimon and JPMorgan Chase on exercising Capitalism for the sake of money without regard to the consequences or accountability to the investors who trusted JPMorgan Chase with their money.

The Republican Rope-a-dope

For those of us who remember the great Mohamed Ali, then you are familiar with many of his sayings, such as “Float like a butterfly and sting like a bee”, and “I’m so fast that last night I turned off my light in my hotel room and was in bed before the room was dark”. What fight fan can forget his coined, “Rope-a-dope” technique which he used against George Foreman in the “The Rumble in the Jungle”?
The Rope-a-dope technique was Ali’s trick of taking whatever Foreman was throwing at him, covering up, pretending to be beaten, then when his opponent was ready to celebrate his victory come out swinging and knock him out.

Well, the Republican’s must have studied the great Ali fight plan to come up with their latest bit of maneuvering in the canvas ring of politics. Remember last year when Paul Ryan and the House of Representatives under Republican leadership held the country’s credit for ransom when his party refused to pass a vote to raise the debt ceiling, (something that they approved eight times under George W. Bush) and caused the U.S. to lose its Triple A bond rating for the first time in history? The outcome of a compromise was for the creation of a “Super Committee” to examine cuts that would yield a 2.3 trillion dollar savings to reduce the deficit. Both sides installed a caveat into the  legislation; if the Super Committee failed to reach the desired deficit reductions a “sequester” would occur that required specific cuts evenly distributed in both Defense spending and Domestic Programs.
Guess what, the Super Committee failed to reach an agreement, (Who of you thought it really would and where can I send you a deed for the ocean front property I have in Arizona?).

Now, instead of allowing the mandatory cuts to take place in the Defense Budget as agreed, the Republicans have awakened from their self-imposed stupor and are proposing instead, additional cuts in Domestic programs.  This would include the stripping of governmental regulators’ ability to wind down failing financial firms, cut additional spending on Medicare, and end Obama’s housing program to help struggling homeowners. Further it would eliminate “Meals on Wheels” for the poor and elderly, (part of that safety net Romney keeps saying is in place), and impact funding for other various programs that aid the Middle Class.

Since the compromise was made in the form of law, the Republicans are attempting to pass legislation to repeal the specific “sequester” clause that would allow for the proposed changes. They have refused to even consider any increases on the wealthiest in this nation to fuel their continued support of a militaristic build up that exceeds the budget the Pentagon has requested. (Remember, the war in Iraq was supposed to be paid for by the oil income from a conquered Iraq, at least that’s what Dick Cheney said before we invaded.)

So while the Democrats believed they had beaten some sense into the House Republicans by getting them to agree to mandatory Defense cuts in the event of a lack of a Super Committee agreement, the Republicans were doing a Rope-a-dope and just waiting for the Super Committee to fail so they could pummel the Domestic Programs they hate.

They honestly believe they can move so fast they can turn the lights out before the American public sees what they are doing. Maybe they can, or just maybe the American public will be doing the “Rope-a-dope” on the Republicans and knock these guys lights out at the next election.

In light of the upcoming elections I’ve decided to start up once again and climb up on the stump to express yet another opinion amongst the thousands that are flooding the electronic airwaves. For those of you who don’t know the origin of the “Stump Speech” it is derived from traveling candidates who in order to be seen would stand on the nearest tree stump to deliver their speech. Another synonym would be the “Soap Box” where the candidates carried a crate around and stood on it in a crowd. Regardless, I’m standing on my ‘virtual’ stump to express my views on the upcoming race for the Whitehouse.

The American public has a choice in November between two parties separated by a common pool of money. I say common pool because both candidates receive donations from many of the same benefactors who hedge their bets by covering both participants, albeit not always at the same level of donation to each. Additional funds are channeled through PACs with special interests in the outcome. The landscape of this race has been changed radically by the Supreme Court’s ruling allowing for the formation of Super PACs that collect millions of dollars from corporations rather than individuals allowing for a possible game changing advantage to the candidate who panders the most to interests of these corporations, (“Corporations are people too, my friend”).

The result is a race that has been projected by some to exceed an 8 billion dollar price tag. Think about that for a moment; 8 billion dollars. I guess one could argue that at least it is a good cash infusion into the country’s economy as the media/print outlets make a ton of money along with the employment of hundreds of paid campaign staffers, (You didn't think everyone on the campaign trail were volunteers did you?). Still the influence peddling has reached new heights.

The Republicans claim it’s necessary to make sure the public knows the truth about the government, the Democrats claim it’s to tell the truth about the Republicans, (Adlei Stevenson Democratic candidate for President 1952/1956 once said when speaking about the Republican Party, “When they stop telling lies about us, we’ll stop telling the truth about them.”). Either way you can bet the facts generally get reconfigured in both campaigns, so keep FACT CHECK on your computer to assure accuracy. So far, Adlei has been more correct in his assessment than the other way around.

Let’s talk about what’s at stake in this election. The country has expressed in numerous polls, (though personally I have never been called to participate…have you?) that they would like to see the entire bunch in Congress voted out, however when asked if they would vote for their own Representative or Senator, the results indicate 8 out of 10 persons will re-elect them. That means everyone is upset with everyone else’s elected official. If the results mimic the poll then in January we’ll have the same people in both houses and the same gridlock that currently exists.

This makes the Presidential position very important. There are those who believe the man (or woman) at the top does little to make a difference as whomever the occupant is as they are controlled by the money that elected them. There are others who believe the President sets the agenda and the pace for Congress. Both theories are wrong.  Unless the President’s party is in control of both houses of government, his agenda becomes captive to the majority in one or the other of the houses, and while the President may feel an obligation to the business money in his election coffers, the general philosophy of his party dictates the direction of his actions. Therefore a conservative minded President with a conservative platform who has received the greater annuity from the business, (remember I said not all giving is equal), will tend to support a strict agenda that favors those business interests. On the flip side, a President who has received big business bucks, but comes from a more moderate platform, will temper his agenda to include the constituents in his party.

So what does this mean in a Romney vs. Obama race? If Romney wins, and the Congress remains the same then the thin margin of Democrats in the Senate maybe the only road bump to programs sponsored by a conservative Republican House. To determine what these may be, one need only refer to the Paul Ryan proposed budget of this year along with programs pushed by the Republicans throughout the last session. These include; cutting funding for SNAP (Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Programs) that help feed the poor and extreme poor (part of the “safety net” Romney mentioned, eliminating the Child tax credit for children of illegal immigrants even though the majority of these children are American citizens by birth, repealing the Affordable Health Care act in whole in which insurance companies must cover pre-existing conditions and at the same time eliminate the governmental coverage of Medicare substituting private medical plans from insurance companies (which won’t be obligated to cover existing conditions). Additional targets include, revamping of Social Security, extending the Bush tax cuts on the top ten percent, elimination of environmental regulations on industry, rollback of banking and financial regulations, reduction of student loans, and elimination of programs such as the Peace Corp, and spending increases in defense.

If Obama is re-elected and if these programs are put forth he is more likely to veto them and with a Congress that is similar in statistical make-up a two thirds over-ride is not likely.

Now for those of you who agree with the Republican priorities a Romney win is a good thing. However, keep in mind the consequences that come with the above. Just stop and think for a moment. In 2001 the U.S. was on its way to paying down the National debt. There was a 500 billion dollar surplus. With the election of G.W. Bush and a  Republican majority in both houses, the same scenario was enacted the result of which was an accumulation of debt of nearly 3 trillion dollars by 2008, unemployment in excess of 8%, two wars, and a meltdown at Wall Street where the DOW dropped below 9,500 points.

Personally I don’t agree with everything the current administration has done and the Lord knows that when the Democrats had control of both houses in 2009 it failed to focus on some of the most important issues necessary to curb financial mismanagement, but then it did manage to accomplish a considerable amount (check www.RepublicansforObama.com) before the Tea Party took over the Republican Party and moved it to the right of Benito Mussolini.

Further before one starts proclaiming the fiscal accountability of the Republican Party remember that when Obama took office, the country was in about an 11 trillion dollar hole of which Republican Administrations were in the Whitehouse for 9 trillion of that amount. Further remember that during the Bush years we went to war against a country that had not attacked us, had no weapons of mass destruction, was not harboring Al Qaida, cost us over 1 trillion dollars with the loss of over 4,000 service personnel and over 100,000 Iraqi citizens. Additionally, environmental regulations were eased to where three out of every five mountain tops in the coal belt were being stripped mined and pushed into the creeks below, credit card regulations were abandoned allowing interest rates to exceed 20%, bundling of loans were permitted and banks were allowed to speculate on their own offerings often selling short to make cash before the assets were declared worthless. Let me also mention that although the economy was riding high on the growing bubble, the people making less than $100k per year were experiencing minimal if any economic growth.

I’d also like to point out to all of those people who hate the government and believe that the government should not be meddling in business that if it did not, the Medicare programs your parents currently enjoy (and eventually you) along with Social Security (and eventually you) are government programs and wouldn’t be around. Further, minimum wage, fair labor practice laws, equal right laws, disclosure on food ingredients, medicines, and credit cards would all be removed. In fact most any regulation that impacts the health and well-being of the individual has originated by the Democratic Party. Granted, some of the policies put forth by the Dems are over the edge, but that’s where compromise and cool heads used to revamp the proposals and move them toward the middle. Unfortunately those politicians who lived in the middle have been evicted by those who command the extreme right. Therefore if there is not a pressure valve at the top the good programs will be eviscerated with the bad.

So come November you have a choice. Do you want to sacrifice all of the good that’s in place because you don’t want to see a couple of gay people get married, or would you rather have your Medicare, Social Security, minimum wage, edible food and a list of other benefits disappear?

Your call.