Wisconsin GOP Loses 2 Seats, Keeps Majority

Damn: Recall elections remove 2 GOP seats

Wisconsin had a really good chance to prove to the rest of the country that they would not tolerate a political party whose sole guiding interest seems to be robbing people of their livelihoods and basic human rights and necessities. From the right to collectively bargain, to healthcare, to the right to control your own reproductive organs, the GOP has launched a campaign to limit your freedom, all while at the same time supposedly protecting those same freedoms in the interest of "small government." If Republicans are so interested in having government get out of their lives, why is the Wisconsin legislature described as "been approving Republican-backed bills in rapid succession would likely have ground to a halt if Democrats had won back the Senate"?

Because they really couldn't give a damn about your freedom. What they care about is money and power, and they will use any kind of rhetoric to get it.

And before you go thinking I'm a liberal Repub-basher, I'm not happy with the Dems on this one either. A comment from a citizen who voted GOP is particularly damning:

"This was all supposed to be about the workers' rights, so to speak. But that has not been brought up one time. It's all been misleading, the attack ads, things like that," [John] Gill said. "The one reason they started this recall, they didn't bring up once."

The implication here is that the Dems squandered the chance with a bad campaign. Shame on you, Wisconsin Democratic leaders, for blowing your chance to prove that you can be the better party. Gill doesn't say it outright, but a reader is definitely left with the feeling that if the Dems had been focused on collective bargaining rights and used other rhetoric as supporting arguments, at least this citizen may have voted Democrat instead.

I'm disappointed in Republicans, for taking away rights. I'm disappointed in Democrats, for not recognizing the proper campaign strategy and trying to demolish the Republican party instead of isolating this one issue and killing the Republicans on it. Wisconsin could never be referendum on the national GOP party, but the Dems could have gone a long way into removing this cancer on civil liberties.

And finally, I'm disappointed in the United States of America, for allowing this to happen. Wake up. It's time to not just see that the politicians aren't representing you, but it's time to do something about it. I'm going to place a book list up here soon that I want everyone to read. When you arm yourself with knowledge, you are more likely to see through the political BS that's being slung back and forth on the media. And turn off the TV. The information you hear there is nothing more than heavily processed sound bites meant to keep you well enough informed that you're confused about the whole thing and can't think properly, but not so processed you feel insulted. Let's wake up together and take back our country and take back our rights, from both the Republican party and the Democrats.

Job Data Better Than Expected: GOP Slams Obama?

More proof that the Republican party has lost its collective mind: Republicans Slam Obama Over Jobs Figures

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/republicans-slam-obama-over-jobs-figures-135129109.html

Excuse me, I need to go buy an oxygen tank because I'm laughing too hard. Seriously? Republicans are criticizing Obama because the economy added 117,000 jobs, despite the looming debt crisis. Maybe it's the unemployment rate, which held steady at 9.1%? But of course, the entire U.S. population knows that the unemployment is inaccurate - the truer figure (if you include under-employment) is closer to 22% if you look at this data.

The government also revised data upward for the previous two months. I wouldn't be surprised if this was perhaps a political tactic designed to make us look better in light of the tumble our global reputation took after the debt crisis, but at the same time I respect the desire of the Obama administration to try to save face.

The problem is that we shouldn't need to save face. The debt crisis could be easily avoided, the FAA issue is yet to be completely resolved, and there are solutions to the consumption-focused economy we've driven ourselves headlong into.

This is my favorite quote:

"Today's unemployment report is more proof that all of the Washington spending, taxing, and regulating is devastating our economy," said Republican House Speaker John Boehner, the number-three US elected official.

Where's that O2 tank again? Tax cuts and deregulation have historically been what has tanked the economy - recessions in '91 followed the Bush I tax cuts, and recessions in '01 and '07 followed Bush II tax cuts, while the vast majority of the 90s (under Clinton) saw the biggest growth in U.S. history.

If the GOP has any desire to actually win the hearts of the U.S. public and win back the White House, they are going to have to do better than criticizing Obama every time the man breathes. They are going to have to do better than throwing a tantrum, whether the news is negative OR positive.

If the GOP wants power back, then they have to start listening to those who have the solutions that will get us back to being the strongest economy in the world. Start with a progressive consumption tax, continue with value-added taxes, and end with investing in the human potential of the people that elected them to office.

If, on the other hand, the GOP desires to hold on more to out-dated ideology, I have no doubt the U.S. public will be happy to hold a funeral, laughing all the while at the absurdity of current GOP logic.

Wisconsin GOP Up For Recall: Wait Until 2012 Election

Wisconsin Republicans are beginning to reap what they've sown: Wisconsin GOPer: If you don't like what we did, wait for 2012 instead of recalling me

More evidence of the Republicans' fear of the consequences of Governor Walker's crusade against unions, and then subsequent (and illegal?) tactics on behalf of various parties to make the voting process biased against the liberal voters who could possible recall the representatives.

(Source: http://legis.wisconsin.gov/w3asp/contact/
legislatorpages.aspx?house=Senate&district=8)

Now, State senator Alberta Darling is calling for people to respect the election process and wait until 2012 to vote her out. Sorry, Senator Darling, but the recall process is part of the election process which you signed up for when you ran for office; the fact that you decided to put party politics above having the ovaries to do the right thing does not absolve you of the consequences. You should not be saved the accountability of your actions simply because you were following party line.

The Republicans have consistently put business above voters, personal wealth above social welfare, and the interests of their own power-hungry corporate backers above those of the men and women working the bottom rungs of those same corporations. Enjoy your medicine. I hope you come back a stronger party that is better able to lead this country to a more prosperous time.

Until then, quit whining when people have the gumption to stand up for themselves. They are doing the very thing that defines U.S. patriotism - protecting the poor from the tyranny of the wealthy.

The Republicans Are Not Interested In Helping You

It doesn't get much clearer than this folks, from Mr. Erick Erickson: House Republicans, This Is Your Time For Choosing

Choosing what, Mr. Erickson? Choosing to have unemployment at 25%? Your recommendations that House Republicans stick to their No guns will only have the effect of shooting ourselves in our feet. The GOP has consistently been out of step with U.S. opinion throughout the budget process, failing to meet essentially the first requirement of voters: Do your fricking job.

That doesn't mean say no because you can. That doesn't mean waste time and moan and complain until things are so critical it causes this mess. That doesn't mean being contrary.

Per Mr. Erickson, "Should the United States lose its bond rating, it will be called the “Obama Depression”. Congress does not get pinned with this stuff."

How stupid do you think the U.S. public is? Do you think we cannot see the frustration on Obama's face as once again the GOP has denied him on the very basis that it's him they have to agree with?! Do you think we don't see the statements you are making over and over again and realize that it's the GOP who is holding up the process?

19 polls released recently said that a majority of the U.S. public now recognizes that taxes must be raised (see here). The deficit cannot be cut solely by abolishing spending. The government requires some revenue to function, therefore the government requires taxes. I wonder if Republicans would continue to drop the tax rate until the government can no longer pay for the salaries. Then what? They take over and declare themselves Emperor of all of Rome?

If the U.S. public supports raising taxes, then the GOP needs to shut up and let the Democrats raise taxes. Really, the GOP has nothing to lose. They have fought valiantly against raising taxes. If they agree to it, and it causes the country to fall into depression, then they will be right, and the GOP will be able to say a giant "I told you so" to the U.S.

And here is where we get to the truth about Republicans. The rhetoric they are spewing isn't so much about the concern over the country if raising taxes fails to help the economy; they are concerned over what happens when raising taxes works. The Democrats get all the credit, and the GOP looks bad for delaying the solution to the U.S.'s faltering economy.

This is what the GOP is afraid of, and why they are fighting so hard against EVERYTHING Obama and Congressional Democrats throw at them. They aren't afraid of sending the U.S. into an economic tailspin; they are afraid the Democrats will win.

Kind of an interesting statement on the amount of power the Republicans think the Democrats have, huh?

Mr. Erickson goes on to talk about TARP, and how we have discovered the money was mostly allocated to banks. The economist's response would be "Of course you give money to the banks. The banks need the money to make loans to get the economy moving again." If Mr. Erickson had any true comprehension of credit markets, he would understand this. He would also understand that TARP failed not because it went too far, but because it didn't go far enough to help individual homeowners. Whose fault was that? Republicans. Republicans made TARP so unpopular that it failed to include a provision to protect homeowners, which helped deepen the recession. This article mentions that the stock market dropped 7% when Republicans "won" and beat TARP (Erick Erickson's Bad Advice).

Here's another great quote from Mr. Erickson: "If the President can force your hand by using entitlements as a lever to punish the American people if you don’t do as he wants, you will have established this as a precedent. From here on out, if you lose this fight, every time you balk at expanding government, social security checks will be withheld, medicare payments will be withheld, and in just a few short years, surgeries will be cancelled, vaccinations withheld, and hospitals shuttered."

Mr. Erickson, the President isn't trying to force your hand by using entitlements to "punish" the U.S. public. He is stopping payments because there is NO MONEY TO PAY FOR THEM, thanks to YOUR party's insistence on keeping unnecessary tax cuts that do nothing for the poor, because for the most part, the poor don't pay income taxes! How can you claim that a tax cut on yachts for millionaires will help a poor person? All it does is free up more money for the millionaire, so he can go buy another yacht, and drive up prices for everyone else! The tax cuts are what got us here!

Mr. Erickson spoke of the wisdom of refraining from making decisions based on fear. This statement by him is about as fear-laden as you can get. He suggests that Obama is a tyrant who will refuse necessary services to people in order to further his political means. A bit like the pot calling the kettle black, considering the Republicans are threatening to throw the U.S. into a second recession in order for them to keep their "high" ground, yes?

The recommendations to raise taxes to help the economy are not based out of fear. They are based from mathematical calculations and observation of other countries. Europe has tax rates that far far far exceed the U.S., yet they manage to pay for universal healthcare, education, among other services. Their gaps between the "rich" and the "poor" are far smaller than here in the U.S., and on average, they get to go on vacation for two months a year.

Would you be willing to pay 30% in taxes to guarantee good education for their kids, universal healthcare, guaranteed employment, and more equal income levels? I would. And I suspect the Republicans will find that the majority of the U.S. would agree with me.

The only beacon of light in all of this for Republicans? If they bail now, which it seems they are doing here, then I can see them successfully spinning it as "Well, we saw what the U.S. public wanted (in higher taxes), so we're willing to compromise now." It makes everybody look good, and the Republicans don't walk away with a broken country and a broken party. I just hope that the U.S. public remembers on election day that it was the Republicans who got us into this mess in the first place, Republicans who kept us down there, and Republicans who delayed us getting out it.

The One Political Chart You Must Read

No joke. You want to know how your Senator or Congresswoman contributed to the current national debt? Check out this wonderfully organized, interactive chart:

Votes That Pushed Us Into The Red

It's so beautiful. Crystal clear. The chart breaks down the recent economic policies into the three categories: the tax cuts (Bush), the wars (Bush, some Obama), and the stimulus package (Obama). In 2001, the U.S. had a balanced budget and we were projected to be out of debt some time in 2008. The biggest contributor to the decline from a balanced budget to the current massive debt? The Bush Tax Cuts.

The two things Republicans voted for? Wars and tax cuts. Democrats on the other hand voted either for the stimulus package, wars and stimulus, or all three policies (wars, tax cuts, and stimulus).

So now, you can see who voted on the biggest failure, and you can hold them responsible for it.

Why Do Americans Continue to Give Obama a Pass? Because It's Not His Fault

From the fine folks at Fox News: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/06/06/why-do-americans-continue-to-give-obama-pass/

I want to take a close look at this article and break it apart piece by piece, so that I can ask the questions that Liz Peek doesn't bother to address, but instead lays squarely on Obama's shoulders without any consideration for the actions of others.

Ms. Peek begins by citing a list of failures, from "pitiful job creation" to "paralysis on immigration" to what she considers a "world-view patently at odds with mainstream."

Okay, let's start by taking a look at some of those "mainstream" views. A recent ABC poll showed that 8 out of 10 Americans support legalizing marijuana for medical use, and around half believe it should be legalized in a more general context (http://abcnews.go.com/PollingUnit/Politics/medical-marijuana-abc-news-poll-analysis/story?id=9586503). This Kansas branch of NBC cites a 60% approval rating for medical marijuana -- a state that can hardly be called the bastion of liberal politics (http://www.ksn.com/news/local/story/Poll-60-percent-of-Americans-support-medical/c1R1odu6dUeP-5rnH0VBeA.cspx). Even the website on which Ms. Peek's article appears quotes a "slim majority of Republicans" (53%) favor legalizing marijuana for medicinal purposes (http://www.foxnews.com/health/2010/04/21/medical-marijuana-support-grows-polls/).

Yet Republicans have consistently come down against any efforts to legalize medical marijuana -- in spite of their other constant call to arms, the restriction of "big government." Excuse me, Ms. Peek, but if the government is telling me what medication I can and cannot use for my illness, how is that supporting a small government? (http://www.ravallirepublic.com/news/state-and-regional/c144dca4-409c-11e0-b58f-001cc4c03286.html, and http://newmexicoindependent.com/69054/republican-bill-would-end-medical-marijuana-program, and I'm sure there are others)

Obama has not come out against medical marijuana. He publically stated he would withdraw federal prosecution of medical marijuana patients and caregivers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/19/us/19holder.html). He supports the use of marijuana as a medical treatment for glaucoma and cancer, and he explicitly states that he would like to see federal law change so he does not have to punish doctors for providing prescriptions for medical marijuana (http://granitestaters.com/candidates/video_obama_02.html).

Read that again, Ms. Peek. Obama wants to change federal legislation so the government will not interfere with a doctor's recommended medical treatment. President Obama wants the government out of medical marijuana. If I didn't know better, I might think he was a Republican, and one who is a bit more in touch with "mainstream views" than you suggested. Hypothetically speaking, if Obama was to introduce legislation that would make medical marijuana legal federally, would the Republicans bow to what the "mainstream" is asking for?

Perhaps medical marijuana is just a fluke. Let's look at gay marriage shall we? Is Obama out of touch with people on this issue?

According a Gallup poll, 53% of Americans support gay marriage. In a breakdown of the poll, all self-identified groups of people saw an increase of approval between 2010 and 2011 except for one group - Republicans. With 70% of those aged 18-34 supporting gay marriage, the future does not look bright for discrimination (http://www.gallup.com/poll/147662/First-Time-Majority-Americans-Favor-Legal-Gay-Marriage.aspx). In the interests of "balance", I looked up how many people oppose gay marriage? The (considerably right-wing) articles that came up saying the majority of Americans oppose gay marriage were older than 2009; the first listing an article from 2004.

Oh, and before I turn to look at Obama's stance on gay marriage, I wanted to remind Ms. Peek that we are discussing government laws that restrict a person's ability to marry the adult of their choosing. That's right, big government is in your bedroom, telling you whom you can and cannot sleep with, create a family with, receive social and legal benefits from, and so on. The Republicans are opposing legislation that gets the government OUT of one of the biggest decisions I could make in my life. And the Republicans are opposed to the government telling me what I can and cannot do, right?

Right?

In February 2011, Obama announced he would no longer "oppose legal challenges to DOMA (The Defense of Marriage Act)" (http://articles.latimes.com/2011/feb/23/nation/la-na-obama-gay-marriage-20110224). While largely a symbolic act, it had the effect of forcing Congress to hire its own lawyers if they wished to defend DOMA. Congress - of which the Senate is controlled by Republicans. Neat trick, Obama. You know you can't get the legislation passed yet, so you're forcing the Republicans to legally defend an Act which goes against the wishes of the majority of the American people. Brilliant!

I will concede that Obama originally came out as against the recognition of legal gay marriage, softening his stance by recommending civil unions that would enjoy the same benefits. I found it a little odd listening to the echoes of segregation coming out of a black man's mouth, but stranger things have happened. However, he has recently taken gradual steps that suggest maybe he's coming out of the discrimination closet, so to speak, as pointed out by this Fox News post (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/10/28/obama-suggests-stance-gay-marriage-evolve/).

Oddly enough, as of the writing of this posting, you are slightly correct, Ms. Peek, in that Obama is out of touch with the mainstream view. But perhaps you meant is that the majority of Americans oppose gay marriage? Sorry, I can't give you that part. Half credit.

In some cases, Republicans are actually more in touch with the American mainstream than President Obama. Former RNC chairmen Ken Mehlman announced not only that he supports gay marriage, but that he is gay himself (http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2010/08/former-rnc-chairman-is-gay-will-support-gay-marriage.html). GOP Senator Allan Kittleman (R-Howard) of Maryland is a long-time supporter who cites his passionate belief in equal rights as the motivator for his support (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/annapolis/2011/02/gop_senator_announces_support.html). My favorite: A former Iowan Republican state senator announced that he was forming a group called Republicans For Freedom, a group for gay-marriage supporters in the Republican Party. His justification? The small government argument. A true Republican! (http://www.ctpost.com/default/article/Ex-GOP-senator-to-announce-pro-gay-marriage-group-1402696.php)

I've looked at these two issues with how Obama relates to "mainstream" American views. Here's a few more, a little less in-depth:

Abortion:
A recent Gallup poll revealed that the majority of Americans oppose abortion morally and support some legal restrictions for it (http://www.gallup.com/poll/147734/Americans-Split-Along-Pro-Choice-Pro-Life-Lines.aspx). Obama himself voted against legislation banning partial birth abortion, but has supported states' rights to restrict late-term partial-birth abortions (http://www.ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm).
Grade: Full credit, but with a caveat. The Gallup poll noted that the pro-life/pro-choice boundaries were drawn along age lines, not gender lines, suggesting the possibility that what could be considered "mainstream" views may shift in the coming decades. If so, Obama is a visionary, or "on the side of history." If not, then yes, full credit for Obama being "out of touch."

Immigration:
Sixty-eight percent of Americans believe the top priority regarding immigration should be the active pursuit of visa violations, followed by increasing security forces on the border at 61% (http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0712/Americans-top-priority-on-illegal-immigration-visa-violators).
Obama has consistently supported amnesty, while generally 2/3s of Americans oppose it (http://www.numbersusa.com/content/polls/oppose-amnesty.html). On the other hand, Obama did support legislation making it easier to verify the citizenship status of employees, which increased the prosecution of employers of illegal aliens (http://www.usimmigrationsupport.org/obama-immigration.html), a position supported by 71% of Americans (http://www.endillegalimmigration.com/illegal_immigration_polls_surveys/index.shtml).
Grade: Incomplete - Immigration is a very complicated topic, so in some ways Obama agrees with mainstream and in other ways he doesn't. His policies also have shifted over time, making it more difficult to grade. My opinion is also that current events suggest that immigration is a bit lower on the priority list due to the laser-like focus on jobs and the economy, so the diversion here between Obama's views and the "mainstream" is less of a flashpoint than it was in the 2008 election.

This is not a complete list. I'll probably do another short blog comparing Obama's view on taxes with "mainstream," specifically the "Taxes On The Rich" so oft-quoted by the media, to further flesh out Ms. Peek's point on Obama being out of touch with mainstream views.

I also intend to further delve in to her article. Why hers? Because she either lightly touches directly, or suggests indirectly, nearly every single controversial issue that Obama and the Republicans disagree, while simultaneously employing logic that considers half the issue at best. I intend in further blogs to show that Ms. Peek has failed to go beyond the very surface of the issues, and missed the critical answer to the question she posed: The reason why Americans are going easy on Obama is because they knew he has a psychotic Republican party to deal with. The Republicans have made it so difficult that Obama would find a fight in trying to buy a box of facial tissue for the Men's bathroom. Americans know this, they can see it, so they understand that ANY victory Obama gets is miraculous. And he's gotten some rather important ones.

Anyway, I'll adress this and more later. For now, I'm going to go smoke a bowl and kiss my wife. ;)