inthetrunkroom

MY RANT – I AM ENTITLED TO ONE PER YEAR

There are numerous topics one may wish to explore here but, accepting the label”political wonk ” as I have, one ought to expect that much of my posts will be devoted to political issues and , of particular interest, how politics affects our every day world. While keeping the discussion relatively balanced – OK, a bit to the Progressive Left -a serious attempt to hold to the originating stipulations has been fairly successful. However, with all that has  transpired over the past year with the election and inside the Beltway with all its what can only be described as chaos, I take the liberty of posting a total  RANT.

While it may not be as balanced as it should, perhaps this venting will awaken some to ask deep and serious questions about where government as we know it is heading and whether or not most will finally abandon the posture of lemmings and begin to take a stand. With all that has been taking place inside the Beltway over the past year and especially within the past several weeks, it is painfully evident that our system of government is broken. Indeed, I contend it has been for a number of years but lately the evidence is overwhelming. While one can point fingers, it is fact that there is plenty of blame to go around and, though I agree with that, I must contend that the GOP  and its Tea Party cohorts are the prime suspects.

In 2008, I was uneasy for the young senator from Illinois who was elected President . Not because I didn’t think he was the right candidate – Mr McCain would have been a complete and utter disaster – but for other concerns. At that time there were several reasons, most of which were born out over the next four years. It was frightfully difficult for him but, after four years of calculated obstruction, many felt that the reelection of the President would allay much of that. I sensed the worst was yet to come and so far that seems to be a correct assessment. I fault the democrats for some of it – mostly based , in my opinion, on the complete and total lack of leadership in both the House and the Senate. I also believe that the administration has been given some rather poor advise on the the domestic front. The biggest issue was and still is the overly conciliatory nature of how they conduct  business. I give the team the first two years but after the 2010 mid term election and that insane lame duck session in which so many poor choices were made, one would think they would have learned what the GOP underlying agenda was. And if they didn’t, the Minority Leader of the Senate spelled it out in no uncertain terms at a press conference less than two weeks after that election ! And so the obstruction and hostage taking continues and they are driving us to total economic collapse, even when solutions to some issues are quite plain.
A good lead in to the other side of the aisle – the GOP. It used to named the “Grand Old Party” but now, with less than 10 % approval rating, the tag should be the “Grand Obstructionist Party” and if anyone doubts that and doubts that this is a calculated, planned and orchestrated strategy on both the national and on the state levels, then all I can say is please watch something else besides Hannity and listen to someone other than Limbaugh.
In a recent interview on NBC’s Meet the Press, Colin Powell made the comment that there is a dark vein of intolerance in the Republican party. He was addressing the issue of continuing racism in our country and particularly in the political arena, citing recent comments by John Sununu and Sarah Palin. And, while I agree with the former Secretary of State, I sense that there is far more than just racial intolerance involved. There is an outright disdain for forward thinking and for those who understand that government is about all the people, not just those who pay you to advance their agenda. The level of hatred for progress is unfathomable !
Case in point. The incoming Republican administration was handed a budget surplus for FY 2001 of $452 billion dollars. After two terms, the administration presented the new president with a budget deficit of over $11 trillion dollars, raising the national debt by 27% and the deficit by over 40 %  With unpaid for tax breaks costing over $2 trillion and two unpaid for wars, we sank deeper in to debt.  With the complete abdicating of oversight responsibility, the Administration allowed Wall Street  to be equally as reckless in its trading, mortgage lending and general financial dealings. The 112th Congress, in an effort to pay for all of the recklessness of the previous  eight years without raising ANY  tax revenues, decided to find the funds at the expense of cutting Medicaid by $810 billion, privatizing Social Security, eliminating Medicare by converting it to a voucher system with an annual cap of $15,00, cutting the SNAP by $133 billion, reducing Pell grants to a level 30% of the current level, eliminating the federal emergency unemployment fund and cutting all remaining non defense discretionary funds by 35%. Take note – these are all budget items which directly affect some of the more vulnerable populations in the country – the elderly, the children survivors, the disabled and even the returning disabled veterans and their families. This plan, the Ryan Path to Prosperity Plan – would by all CBO accounts, add $240 billion to the overall deficit. There are  other elements of the GOP strategy which are equally disheartening. The House GOP Women’s Caucus – 24 members – polled 22 members voting AGAINST the Violence Against Women Act, polled 15 members voting against the Lilly Ledbetter Act and 13 members voting against the Paycheck Fairness Act (Cf., International Business Times and the Congressional Record ). The House refused to fund the Consumer Protection Financial Bureau and has blocked confirmation of its Director for months.
There are many other elements which demonstrate just how far removed the everyday people the republican party has strayed.
One in six children go to bed and then show up at school the next morning hungry and yet the plan is to now totally eliminate the SNAP program. Educationally, we are, among the thirty-four industrialized nations, seventeenth in science and twenty-fifth in math and yet the GOP plan is to reduce or eliminate Pell assistance and indeed, the entire Department of Education – all this while facing the fact that of sixty per cent of jobs coming in the near future only twenty per cent are matched by the U S workforce. An interesting statistic, considering job training programs will not survive the budget cuts either. ( The Stem Crisis ; Harvard University Program for Education Policy and Governance).
How can the 113th Congress , as it continues  the obstructionism of the 112th, dare to hold Disaster Relief funds hostage to more cuts in the safety net, while the GOP had no problem pushing funds for relief in the Gulf States – RED GULF STATES – in the aftermath of  Katrina  ??
Why is it that we tolerate members of Congress taking an oath to the likes of Grover Nordquist whose policy is completely devoid of a basis in the reality of how government works and what role tax revenues play in that ?  Should  they not be  bound by their Oath of Office first and above all else ??
And a final observation – how long are we, the people, going to tolerate the machinations of the Tea Party whose agenda is not to obstruct the administration but  “… to reduce the federal government to the size of a bath tub and drown it..”.
It would be a sad time of it if the “Nullification” legislation or Secession legislation being introduced in so many of the  Tea Party Red States would actually be enacted. The nation would truly be destroyed and, while I do not usually succumb to overall panic, I believe that this is the way we are headed – that “Road to Perdition”, as it were and people need to rise up, rid us of these domestic terrorists and demand a government focused on the needs of the nation and the promotion of the general well being – yes, that IS IN THE CONSTITUTION.

On 15 December 2012 in the small community of Sandy Hook Connecticut, a horrible event played out at the Sandy Hook Elementary School. In a community of about 27,000,  this rural, quiet, bucolic place was rocked by evil as twenty-six people were gunned down by a twenty year old for reasons we  may never know.Six of the victims were adults. The remainder were children – yes, children, ranging in age from six to ten years of age.I suspect it will a long long time before this community, a short distance East on Highway 6 from Danbury, regains its composure. I doubt if it will ever completely heal. One has to ask many questions after an event like this. As the several religious leaders of the area spoke at a service at the High School, there are many to remain unanswered. One asks the simple and yet complex question “why”.However, there is at least one question that can be answered and measures can be taken to, if not remedy the concern, at least make serious progress toward it.I sense that the reader already has a fair idea where this one is headed so let’s get to it. The weapons carried by the shooter were three – a Glock pistol, a Sig-Sauer pistol – both 9mm semi-automatics and a Bushmaster AR-15 Assault rifle in .223 caliber with thirty round magazine. For the record, they were all weapons owned by his mother – another victim of  the shooter.I bring this up because it begs the question of  the why and wherefore for these weapons.

Now before readers jump all over me, allow me this personal note. I own a gun. Indeed, I own several. I also have a Concealed Weapons Carry permit – one that is reciprocal in no less than nine other states including those in which I sometimes travel. I fully understand the legitimate use and utility of a good pistol and that of a good rifle. If you find yourself in the far out lying areas of the desert or  in the mountains here in the Southwest, it is most advisable to have one or the other with you, preferably both.  I  simply do not understand the  utility or use for a military style weapon with a thirty round banana  for civilians. I do not accept the often posed argument that enforcing a ban on these assault weapons somehow curtails one’s ability to hunt effectively. If you didn’t get it with the first two rounds, believe me, that game is long gone ! Believe me, a round from a reliable bolt action is sufficient for most varmints and game.

The Second Amendment states ” A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed . “The lawyers, scholars and so called patriots ( I use that term very guardedly ) have argued the actual meaning of this for decades. Considering none of them was around at the time of the actual writing of this amendment, all is more academic discussion than anything. I have  even argued it all from a strict grammar point of view, noting the curious use of the comma in 18^th Century writing.  The language is based on English Common Law written in 1689 during which time it was seen prudent to allow citizens to be armed against a hostile King. I don’t figure this applies to the U S in 2012, the assertions of Tea Party politicians notwithstanding. Neither does the whole “militia” element as the National Guard  is more part of the regular Army than ever before and is not under the sole governance of the states. All that being said, there is still the constitutional protection for citizens to own, keep and bear arms. The problem comes when you have to discuss what arms, what limits on arms and armaments, and should there be limitations based on the needs for the proverbial greater  good.   I leave this forever ongoing discussion to the legal eagles and academics. I generally hold no credence in the rants of those so called patriots. My posture in all of this, especially in light of Sandy Hook Elementary School, as well as other shootings of recent times, is what can be done, what should be done and what are we, the people, willing to do. It has been reported on most every news outlet that 74 % of NRA members favor a stricter system of background checks for the purchase of weapons. 87% of non NRA  members feel similarly. If the NRA membership is saying we, as a nation, need background checks for all purchases – including at gun shows, then why does the NRA persist in fighting these rules. I cannot understand why so many are against background checks. It seems logical and prudent and would go a long way toward lessening catastrophes such as we have seen recently. It indeed might have made a huge difference in a Tucson shopping center when a borderline deranged shooter killed several and severely wounded several more, including  Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. Again, the arguments will persist for years and sadly, no matter what Congress and or the states decide to do, there will be many who will rant and rave about their “rights”. I choose to ignore most of that as being irrelevant. There will also be long and hard discussions about the meaning of the word “infringed” and the scope of that meaning. I, on the other hand, as  a long time gun owner and for a  while, competitor, strongly hold that  in this case,  measures need to be enacted that focus more on the common good and the protection of our communities. This is not infringement in the broader sense. These measures do not bar ownership, etc. They do bring  rational policy to an ever changing society and responds to modern concerns.

And what, you ask, are these measures ? In my opinion, I would like to offer some specifics which I consider to be essential. I will not attempt to forecast where Washington will take this. Nor will I try to predict the reactions and responses of the individual states. However, after arguing, discussing, researching and writing about this matter for years, allow me to propose what I hold are rational, meaningful strategies for addressing what is clearly a national crisis. First and foremost, pending clear and specific definition, it is paramount that the Assault Weapons Ban of the Clinton era be reauthorized. There is no need or utility for military style weapons and there is no need for enhanced ammunition capacities. Secondly, the must be, as a federal mandate, background checks on the purchase of all firearms. With the available technology of today, this can and should include Gun Shows. Additionally, as is the case in many states, a waiting period for hand guns should be mandatory. Really, it’s not a big deal and many have been doing it for years. All multiple unit purchases should be reported to ATF. OK,  for more reasons than I will reveal, I am as against Big Government intruding in everyday stuff as anyone, but this is quite different, especially in border states. Also, ALL weapons confiscated at crime scenes shall be destroyed, not sold out the back door as has been the case with several police departments.

There is another element here which is a bit more delicate in nature, that of the element of mental health. Many of those who perpetrate these horrible crimes are or recently have been receiving services in the mental health system. I hold that all persons who are under  extended care of a clinical psychologist or psychiatrist should be reported to ATF so that they are barred from purchasing firearms for the duration of treatment.  Sadly, there are many who should be but are not receiving mental health services and that is a concern to be addressed as well.I do not propose this will end such mindless shootings  as in the past week. I don’t expect the untold number of random, drive by style shootings to diminish substantially in the beginning. BUT, perhaps as we move forward, the mindset will change and we will come to realize that it time for a rational discussion on policy which focuses heavily on the safety of our communities. To quote Harvey Wasserman writing in the Huffington Post, “… We are the ones with the real Seond Amendment remedy — the clear Constitutional demand for a “regulated” gun ownership that serves rather than destroys the “security of a free state”.

It’s the day after what can only be called one of the most intense election seasons in history. In the end, the country elected a President for a  second term – something which, all things considered, so many had thought an impossible task. But it did happen and the exhausting season of primaries, debates and outlandish campaigning bordering on sheer looney toons has finally ended and the proverbial die is now cast.

But let’s not be too hasty to leave this all behind. As we are often told, we must learn from history – a concept  which we have, in my opinion, miserably failed to grasp – and some elements of this election season were nothing less than historic in nature. Historic in its level of venom, of the twisting of actual events and narratives, in the spewing of streams of out and out lies. As Professor Kevin Kruse of Princeton University noted in a recent article in the New York Times, the real loser in this election was TRUTH. I would also add CIVILITY.

Some time ago, the late statesman Daniel Patrick Moynihan noted that one is indeed entitled to one’s own opinion BUT one is not entitled to ones own facts.Fact checking was once the purview  and a foundation element of all news reporting. Now that has, as Professor Kruse says, become the province of a specialized few.A senior Romney campaign aide, Neil Newhouse,  summed it all up when he  declared to ABC News that ” We’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact checkers..”.Now, while I accept that both sides of the aisle often play footloose with facts and cherry pick information to suit the cause, the GOP has of late, far exceeded the limits of truth, any semblance of integrity and all levels of civil discourse – and all with what seems to be total impunity . One has to question the utter lack of ethics on the part of candidates – candidates on all levels. The complete disdain for facts has, in my opinion, placed many who seek  or hold public office  as seeming to be wandering in some sort of alternative reality.

Case in point – when Mr Romney boldly declared to an audience in Ohio that the Jeep division of Chrysler had been sold to an Italian auto company and was moving its entire operation to China.In spite of strong and emphatic assertions to the contrary by the CEOs of both Chrysler and GM, stating that the statement and subsequent ad were entirely without merit or basis in fact, both the president and vice president candidates continued with this falsehood on the campaign trail.

There was an statement made by the GOP candidates that the President had issued a policy revision on the Welfare to Work program in the states. It was alleged that in this policy revision, all work requirements associated with the Welfare to Work programs were ended. There would be no more work requirement. The facts are so distant from this statement. What the President actually did was to issue a long overdue response to a letter sent by no less than six governors ( including then Governor Romney of Massachusetts ) which asked the  federal government for more latitude in determining the work requirement so as to more in tune with local circumstances. While the White House agreed with the need for some leeway in these determinations, the response did in fact, make the requirement that, if this waiver of sort was to be  in place, it must be shown to increase the job placement by twenty per cent in order to be maintained. Now, in the face of clear and compelling evidence to the contrary, why did BOTH GOP candidates persist in this patently false declaration. And, more importantly, why did the mainstream news media fail to raise the issue.

In the face of documented analysis by several  sources like the Urban Institute, the Congressional Budget Office and the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, the Affordable Care Act would, as part of its implementation, eliminate close to 130,000 low wage, non skilled jobs. It would, on the other hand, add over 800,000 jobs in the medical and health care sectors. Of course, Tea Party legislators such as Michelle Bachmann of Minnesota, Eric Cantor of Virginia and John Boehner of Ohio continually blast the Act as being a job killing” law. What most people do not know is that these people are quoting a study conducted by the NFIB ( National Federation of Independent Businesses ) which was commissioned by the the U S Chamber of Commerce a full two years before the Act was actually passed.  I sense that the late venerable newsman Walter Cronkite is writhing in his grave.

Throughout the lengthy campaign season, the GOP across the board ,  national and local candidates  alike, has  constantly and consistently lied about so many issues important to most people. There was the whole ” Birther” nonsense resurfaced by the “mouth from Manhattan”. Donald Trump. There was the “Death Panel ” raised by several candidates, including the VP candidate. There was the whole 716 billion dollars “stolen ” from Medicare beneficiaries , time and again reliably refuted as being misleading at best and false, at worst.In one local election, the opposition ad stated that the GOP candidate voted against the interests of veterans. An ad to refute this claim was posted, showing a veteran stating that with the invention of the candidate, she was able to get what she needed. The question remains, why did she have to go to the then Congressman in the first place. Could it be that in fact he did vote not once but twice against the G I Bill and once against the overall  Veterans Benefits bill which included job training ( Cf. Roll Call of Votes – Washington Post ). In spite of this, there was no challenge to the  fabrications.

The apparent dismissal of facts as being relevant to the debate or that they are even necessary any more was equally met with what has to be the worst flow of venom in recent political history. The GOP candidates made their share of comments, outlandish as they were. The GOP surrogates – another story entirely. From the former Speaker of the House, to the former governor of New Hampshire to sitting legislators to the king of comb over to the bellicose idiots on talk radio and Fox ( I refuse to call it “news” ) we heard such insane epithets as the President does not know how to be an American, is not an American, only got accepted to Columbia University and Harvard Law because of quotas and Affirmative Action, charges that he wants to keep as many people on public assistance as possible in order to get votes, that he is  a marxist, a socialist or worse, a Muslim terrorist infiltrator. Imagine calling the President of the United States a liar in full voice during the State of the Union Address – REALLY, Joe Wilson !! It all more than sickens me, this level of complete lunacy.

While I have my suspicions about the source of much of the animosity against this President,this is nothing short of frightening.

In the world of politics, one probably should tolerate a certain level of hyperbole and exaggeration and self promotion. After all, in some ways, politics, campaigning and seeking political office is  in large part marketing. One can even tolerate a certain level of attack on the opposition, its policies and its vision or lack thereof.  But this election season held out a level of calculated lies and misinformation on all levels and, when you pair that with the element of the huge amounts of influence peddling, I strongly hold it is time to make wholesale changes to how we elect holders of public office.

How you change the process is negotiable and possible. What one does about ignorance, calculated slander, planned misinformation, fear mongering – short of continuing the fight and spreading the facts, I don’t know. Perhaps one day, indeed, TRUTH and CIVILITY will win out.

In 1965, Congress passed the Voter Rights Act. Amended several times through 1975, it provided safeguards against various discriminatory practices designed to limit or  eliminate access to voting, specifically among minority populations and newly enfranchised groups.  Fast forward to 2010 and since the rise of the Tea Party Republicans  any semblance of respect, civility and rational thinking, let alone integrity on any level in the political arena is long gone. There seems to only be a place for radical extremism. This mentality sets the stage.                                                                                                                  Now in 2012 we find ourselves in the midst of a presidential election which has deteriorated to muck and mire to say the very least. The level of misinformation and outright lies is beyond comprehension and, in my opinion, the true nature of GOP politics is out in the open.

In an interview with the National Journal on 23 October 2010, Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell, the Senate Minority  Leader, stated that “.. single most important  thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one term president”. The GOP and particularly the Tea Party Republicans in Washington continue to strive to make that happen. Mindless and extreme  obstructionism in the House has successfully blocked numerous attempts to bring jobs bills and economic recovery measures to the floor, thus crippling the recovery efforts of the Administration. On the state level, though, there is a new monster which has raised its ugly head. Under the leadership of Tea Party legislatures and extreme conservative GOP governors a widespread, and I believe orchestrated waive of voter suppression laws and less than ethical voter registration practices have been put in place. The  premise was ostensibly to stem the tide of in person voter fraud but in pretty much all the states involved, study after study revealed that such massive voter fraud as simply non existent. In Pennsylvania, right in the actual opening statement in a court filing, the State stipulated that “.. it is not aware of any incidents of in person voter fraud in Pennsylvania and has no direct knowledge of voter fraud elsewhere.”.  Officials also said they could offer no evidence that voter fraud would occur in the November 2012 election in the absence of a photo ID law. (Philadelphia Inquirer 26 July 2012 ). And yet, in spite of that, the law was passed and was enacted. It clearly was geared to repressing voter turnout in targeted minority areas and those which are heavily Democratic in voter trends.  In  Ohio, the Secretary of State Jon Husted pushed to have early voting eliminated on the three days immediately before election day, days on which many shift workers and low income citizens tend to vote, as well as those wishing to avoid long lines on election day. He fired two county election officials who wanted to maintain those early voting days in their county. In Florida, an audio picked up by an answering machine records a volunteer for the Clay County  Republican Party clearly stating that the President is a Muslim and wants to “get rid of your Medicare. She also stated that the President wanted to turn the country into a socialistic country ( St Augustine Record ).   In Texas, a group called True the Vote, started by a suburban housewife in 2010, has put itself up as the defender of voter integrity.  It has such a storied history of doctored photos, skewed documentation, not to mention its close affiliation with the  King Street Patriots (a.k.a. The Tea Party in Texas ), some members of congress are calling for an investigation of its obviously extremist, discriminatory and baseless tactics.Radical  extremism at work.  The Republican National Committee engaged the services of a company, Strategic Allied Services, to conduct voter engagement activities in five states. The company was hired only after the RNC convinced them to change their name so that previous misdeeds would not interfere with the 2012 efforts. As a result of their being discovered submitting hundreds of faked registration forms in Florida to support the RNC’s contention of widespread voter fraud, their activities were suspended in Florida, Nevada, Colorado, North Carolina and Virginia – all highly contested states for the GOP.It is nothing less than amazing to what lengths Reince Priebus and the RNC will got to insure that Mitch McConnell gets his wish fulfilled.

I am all in favor of clean elections. Over the centuries we certainly have seen enough of crooked politicians, rigged elections and intimidation activities at he polls, especially on the local levels. Making certain that ALL elections are fair and not subject to fraudulent practices is laudable. However, one must question not only the tactics but also the timing of these obviously agenda driven measures initiated by Tea Party influenced legislatures and governors. The very fact that all of this cranked up post the 2010 election with implementation timed to be just a matter of months, and in some cases weeks before a national election makes it all quite suspicious.  Some state politicians have even gone on record attesting to the underlying purpose of these laws of suppression. Prime example is the statement of Pennsylvania House leader Mike Turzai ( R – PA, 28^th ) unequivocally stated as one of his crowning achievements, the passage of the voter ID law would allow Governor Romney to win Pennsylvania.

Far back in our memory everyone encountered the old tactic of the guy who, in sizing up the competition, either wanted to change all the rules or take his ball and go home. It’s juvenile, or it was back then and we could all be sure that someone else would arrive on the scene with another ball. Not much at stake there except what to do on a Saturday afternoon.Today, in a different context,  it’s indeed a whole new ball game with far far more at stake. Today, this juvenile tactic has  been brought  to bear on the very kingpin of our functioning as a free country and has been taken to an unconscionable level of fraud, deceit and a concerted effort to undermine of the right to vote.To take ones ball and go home is one thing but to go home then come back and build a chain link fence around the  entire playground so no one can play is wrong. It is wrong on so many levels and it is without question un-American.   Call it for what it is – treason !

In 1790,  who was permitted to vote was limited to white male property owners – a hold over from English Law. 1865 saw the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment to be followed shortly thereafter by the Civil Rights Act of 1866. Still, the vote was the purview of men only.In 1870, the Fifteenth Amendment was passed, affording all citizens the right to vote. That right “….. shall not be abridged or denied by the United States or by any stateon account of race, color or previous condition of servitude ..”.  In 1890, Wyoming is the first state to grant full suffrage rights to women. New York will follow in 1917. Full suffrage for women will be granted by the Nineteenth Amendment in 1920. So, a landmark decision here and a landmark Amendment finally affording everyone the right to vote.

Then there was, and is, the continuing undercurrent of Jim Crow laws which targeted Blacks primarily and the poor, black and white,  and others – particularly in the   South – making it near impossible to actually cast a vote. It will not be until 1964, with the passage of the Twenty-fourth Amendment that “… the right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President, Vice-President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax..”.   Keep that thought in mind.

And that is pretty much where things stood – protections for women, minorities, the poor, blacks and other minorities – all granted by federal law and Constitutional Amendment guaranteeing all the right to vote. Not a privilege but a RIGHT.Yes, that’s the way things were – up until 2010. And then it began.

For whatever twisted reason – and I hold that fundamental political  ignorance flavored with not a little bit of racism – the mid term election took a serious hard right turn. I mean  a hard, far and beyond rationale thinking turn to the right and the campaign to basically eliminate the federal government and return ALL governing to the states took off. Promoted by the Tea Party extremists, backed and funded by a select few multi-billionaires and supported by the most singularly obstructionist House of Representatives in history, we were beginning to see matters of government and its functioning grind into a state of chaos.Shortly after the 2010 election, the Minority Leader in the Senate proclaimed at a press conference, that the sole and singular agenda for the GOP was to make sure that the Obama Administration was destined to be a one term administration. That single  event  irrevocably set  the tone for the GOP the next  two years.What followed was calculated, orchestrated obstructionism the likes of which this country has never seen before . Basic legislation which earlier the Republican members not only supported but had, in some cases, actually introduced was now anathema. And anything that came from the White House through the Senate was doa in the House – usually announced by the Speaker before it even came to a vote in the Senate.

Now we are in an election and, working up to this year, there  is raised a new tide in the picture – a “red tide”  if you will. An insidious,  well orchestrated plan to make voting more difficult  for millions of people. Under the guise of wanting to eliminate voter fraud, several states – all with Republican governors and Republican controlled legislatures – introduced and passed laws which would de facto keep people from voting – from exercising that RIGHT under the Constitution.

As noted in a recent article in the Philadelphia Inquirer quoting a  nationwide analysis of nearly 2,000 allegations of voter fraud spanning more than a decade, the findings were that in person voter fraud was virtually nonexistent ( Carnegie-Knight investigative study ). Even in the Court Petition  in Pennsylvania, the defendant ( State  of Pennsylvania ) stipulated that while they had found no evidence of voter fraud, they felt compelled to pass a law to prevent it. What was clearly a partisan piece of legislation, it was  geared to significantly reducing the number of democrats and independents at the polls. Even the Pennsylvania House Leader, Mike Turzai – ( R – PA 28th ) noted in a speech touting the accomplishment of the GOP in Pennsylvania,  that they had passed the Voter ID Law  thus assuring Pennsylvania going to Mitt Romney, the GOP presidential candidate. Not only is this a clear and directed effort to keep traditionally democratic groups from voting, the GOP is actually bragging about it. And while the courts seem  to favor these laws ( at least those with Republican judges ), on the surface  requiring an ID to vote does not seem to be  too objectionable. The devil is in the detail of the specific requirements for that ID and the accompanying so called purging of voter rosters that raises the specter of Jim Crow all over again. Remember that rule about poll taxes  which was declared illegal by the twenty-fourth Amendment. One needs to ask the question about this current wave of anti- voter legislation. Many people, especially seniors and seniors living in rural areas, must find a way to travel to often distant locations and file and pay for applications for new documents, which may or may not be easily retrievable. Is this not clearly  “poll tax” ? And the fact that all of this seems to be carefully timed so as to be damn close to the cut off for election registration should raise monumental red flags ! Demanding new registration documentation from people already on voter rosters and the purging of voter lists, already showing that many legitimate voters are being cast off those lists,  the shortening of polling hours and in some cases, eliminating early voting – does not one understand that this is an orchestrated scheme to seriously dilute the opposition voter block ?  I am not one for conspiracy theories as a rule but this campaign to keep hundreds of thousands from being able to exercise their constitutional Right is a product of a well planned one carefully carried out by the GOP and its affiliates, not to mention its political beneficiaries – those who will considerably increase their wealth with the proposed Romney Tax plan.

I am convinced that the election system in this country needs serious reform, especially for national elections. The so called “Redistricting” rules are clearly out of sync with the rule that voting districts are population based. In the 2000  Redistricting process in Arizona, the Department of Justice handed down the criteria for determining districts. Number one on the list was number of people – population.After all, representation in Congress is based in population. However, when the final drafts were submitted, population was not even close to the top. It took years for the DOJ to finally approve the maps.Several states have had such a history of voter discrimination, that the Department of Justice requires their approval before any changes are made in voting or voting procedures. Not much has changed in those states, protests to the contrary notwithstanding. A  candidate can, in fact, win the popular vote but actually lose the election based on electoral  vote count. In 2000, G W Bush was, in my opinion, not elected but rather appointed by the Supreme Court. Their decision revolved around  widespread voting machine dysfunction in Florida. He did not win the popular vote either but, because of the debacle in Florida and how it was resolved, he polled 271 Electoral votes to Al Gore’s 266.

The system is indeed flawed  and I think both sides of the aisle agree on that. However, to instigate so called reform measures to protect against in person fraud   at a time so close to a national election ( instead of years ago ) and in the complete absence of any documented evidence substantiating the ” problem “, makes one have to conclude this whole campaign is a out and out drive to seize the right to vote away from those who would probably vote for the opposition. It is targeted, well funded, organized and has dire consequences for the future.  It is conceivable that this election may well be decided by money and influence rather than votes. reform is one thing, but reverting to 1790, well, that’s a dog of a completely different color.

To quote Chris Hayes of MSNBC, there is something “… profane about trying to stop people from exercising that right.” ( to vote ).

During the years from the mid sixties to the mid seventies, the country was is a great deal of chaos. Nothing new, for sure. It was that way then and is surely that way now though now it is  far far worse as I hold there is far far more at stake. Back in those days, the turmoil had a focal point – the war in Viet Nam. It divided families, communities, indeed the country and the battle lines were sharply drawn and the discourse was intense, to say the least. As always, the facts got lost in the emotions. There were few who had any inkling as to just why we were in the jungles of Southeast Asia – and the “domino theory” lost all validity by 1965. There were even fewer who knew when we first got into that mess – 1954 –  and what came out years later as the truth was what many were saying back then – the pretext for the stepped up involvement in 1964, the infamous Gulf of Tonkin Incident never actually happened as it was portrayed by the War Department ( ref: The National Security Archives, declassified documents ). We could debate this all over again and probably would reach the same result. Regardless of how one felt, it was a part of history many want to forget but we should not allow it to be forgotten as much of the same mentality that got us there also got us to Iraq in 2003. But that is for another time.

The topic around the table is Conscription, or the Draft, as we knew it.

During the Viet Nam era, millions of young men were drafted.  Thousands never returned. They were drafted from their jobs, or just weeks after high school or college graduation. After a certain year, they were drafted right off the campuses into a War which no one wanted, except the usual war mongers and profiteers. Women were not included in this process and I figure they were fortunate in that respect, though they did, as always, have to keep things together here at home on so many levels – a monumental task at best.  Many evaded the draft by various means. Some leveraged money, political favors and the like. Others took other means, including exile and the label – traitor, or un-American was soon slapped on thousands. Those same labels were slapped on those of us who strongly opposed the war as well.

In 1972, the Draft came to an end and the military became a full volunteer military force. Many thought that was a good thing but some of us had been discussing an alternative to the Draft for a long time. It fell on deaf ears as it was a Draft of a rather different approach – something which few on the power ladder could not or would not entertain. The idea was to have a Draft but not have it entirely military in scope. In those days, we received little or no audience.

Fast forward to 2012 and an article ( Thomas E. Ricks ) in the New York Times of 09 July. While quoting General McChrystal who wants to see the Draft reinstated as it was, the article goes on to discuss an alternative – one which some had indeed heard before. It is broader in scope, far more fair than the Viet Nam era version and include women for the first time. What is interesting is that it is not entirely military in its approach. It provides for “alternative service” and the operative word here is “service”.The key  elements for this scenario allow for some options – active military service in non combat capacities – administrative support, logistics, etc. Generally, these would be low pay, low skills positions. However, they would still have post service benefits, including college tuition. There would be the option to continue in a regular military capacity if so chose. The “Alternative” would have one “Drafted” into a civilian national service for a longer period, same low pay, but the focus would be on civilian service work – maintaining parks, teaching in low income areas,  providing janitorial services in schools, rebuilding roads and the like. This is precisely the concept many were pushing decades ago but maybe now there might be some folks willing to listen. Doubtful, considering this nation’s seeming preoccupation with keeping the war machine well oiled but it is worth some serious consideration.

The NYTimes article then proposes, as part of this new Draft, that all who decide to opt out entirely would, in return, sign a pledge relinquishing all right to government subsidies in the future – Medicare, college loans, etc.

This concept does have merit. A lot of merit. It could relieve the strain on local and state governments needing to chose to either provide some of these services on a limited basis or drop them all together. It could provide a boost for services in many neighborhoods which do not ordinarily have access to them. It might give some people exposure to  what that proverbial “other side of the tracks” really looks like. In my opinion, that alone would be worth it. Back in the days of WW II, honest Conscientious Objectors were placed in just these sort of work settings. So, why not now. That whole military life is not for all but I believe that some time in national service should be. It would not be a something for nothing. It would, in fact, be something for something. Who knows, that whole concept of the country as a community might see a resurgence and this attitude might find its way inside the Beltway where right now, partisan extremism and rampant self interest have replaced functional government and an interest in investing in America.

In the 1991 movie “City Slickers”, a group of  three city guys in the midst of a mid life crisis of sort find there way to a dude ranch type program where they take on a real life Cattle Drive. They meet up with the trail boss, Curly, played by the inimitable Jack Palance – a real character with a whole bunch of , shall we say, idiosyncrasies. In the course of a conversation between Curly and Mitch ( Billy Crystal ) , Curly speaks about “the one thing “. Now, This may work on a cattle drive and for some, might be good advise in the business world. A single product or service honed to the top of the game.. All in all, perhaps a reasonable way to go. However, is this good practice in the world of politics or in the process of deciding an election. Allow me.

Recently, a Memorandum came out from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) requiring that firearms dealers located in the border counties in California, Arizona , New Mexico and Texas alert them to multiple purchases of semi-automatic rifles with the capacity for exchangeable magazines. The purpose was to alert ATF about possible dealings across the Mexican border, a rather lucrative business these days. Without getting in to the blatant stupidity of the “Fast & Furious” project and the mess that followed,  this requirement seemed to be a rational idea. It was not intended to outright ban the sale but rather to alert ATF as to who was buying in bulk, so to speak, especially semi-automatic assault type weapons.

Immediately, the NRA pounced on this as being a clear infringement of rights under the Second Amendment. Of course, that it had little to do with infringing didn’t seem to matter. I called the NRA office in Virginia and spoke with a young lady who, over and over, gave me the company line about the Second Amendment. That this requirement was one way to address the pressing issues in border counties and weapons trafficking made no difference. I tried to press the discussion but then she abruptly hung up.

So, the NRA’s position appears to be this – no matter what the consequences, no matter what the effect, especially those of an international importance,  the NRA will stand for the Second Amendment, or rather their interpretation of it and anything which in any way SEEMS to be any sort of infringement under the Second Amendment will be fodder for its canons.

Many Catholic groups today as before are  hard at pointing out that the Democratic platform supports access to birth control. The opposition to birth control stance – no matter if it is for medical purposes or for actual contraception – is one which the Church has consistently taken as part of its philosophy and tenet of  faith. Whether or not one agrees with it or not is up to the individual. What I found to the point at hand is that many Catholics were perfectly willing to vote, for instance in the 2008 election, based  a lot on that single issue, for the opposition – Senator John McCain. The same senator who doesn’t believe you’ve served your country unless you’ve fought a war ! The same senator who testified before a senate committee expressing regret that funding and involvement in the Viet Nam war was discontinued and  then stood by as the Bush administration lied its way into war in Iraq.

Simple examples of how single agenda lobbying or interest groups – and I fold churches in to that group – can sway an entire voting block. I don’t particularly fault the lobbying group. It is, after all, their role to press their point of view and push their  often singled  minded agenda. However, is it not the responsibility of the voting population to sift out what is valuable and what is not ? What is compelling and what is not ? And most of all, what is the broader view of the agenda of either the political party or the candidate himself or herself as it impacts the society as a whole.

The current election race is a prime example. While some may like the GOP side of having big business control so many facets of our lives, including health care, and get rich doing it,  are you willing to have the principle elements of the Ryan budget become the paradigm for government while sacrificing education, clean water and air and a safe interstate highway system ?  Should you be  willing to eliminate Medicare and other safeguards for those who do or will need it ? Should you be willing to subsidize the wealthiest corporations in the world while forty-eight million children are food insecure ? ( Cf.Feed America .Org and the Con Agra Food Foundation )

These are indeed the questions one must ask. While taking a look at certain aspects of  rule or precept, one must also take the broader context into consideration. Simply put, policy myopia has no place in  the discussion or the decision process if one is to be rational about it all. To stand in concert with the beliefs of one’s church is one thing.  To inflict – and I mean inflict the agenda of the GOP and the Ryan budget  – an agenda which would be nothing short of a catastrophe for the country – is not what I think any church should be all about. It must  take the broader context into consideration on this one. The issues around sectarian rules, whichever church we are addressing, need to be a matter  for the individual.

The context of ones church is similar to non sectarian organizations or associations. They have certain creeds and beliefs, if you will, and that is usually what attracts their membership. All well and good. However, my take is that it is contingent upon the leadership of those organizations to, if not support a particular platform or plank within, at the very least  provide factual information from both sides of the question. This is what I hold is the honest and ethical way to proceed. Then, after all, when one enters the voting booth, it is all up to the individual.

Every four years we grind out a presidential election. It is sometimes a battle between parties, sometimes a virtual three ring circus. Most of the time most voters are casting their vote for one of two reasons. Either it is for a candidate or, more usually it is against a candidate. However, in this year of 2012, we are faced with a quite different reality. This time  it is more about the future of our nation and particularly the state of the union over the next decade and whether, or better, who will survive and in what condition will they find themselves. The presidential election for 2012 has implications for so many on so many levels. It is more than an election. It is, indeed, a choice of monstrous importance and of frightening consequences.

On the one hand, we have the incumbent Democrat.

While there are some flaws in the path that the President has taken, the intent to bring this nation back on to some level of an even keel is clearly evident. While he has been criticized for increasing the debt, one must acknowledge that, as did FDR, the administration rightfully found it necessary to spend in order to stimulate. According to Professor Joseph Stiglitz, noted economist, former Vice President of the World Bank and professor at Columbia University, “… no national economy practicing austerity policies has succeeded in turning around economic crisis.”During the past three plus years, the administration has made some progress on a domestic agenda, in spite of calculated gird lock in Congress.We have seen the passage of the Affordable Healthcare Act which, while it has some issues to be worked out, does or will in fact open the doors to health care for millions who previously could not afford care, assuming SCOTUS doesn’t screw it up. We saw subsidized COBRA for the unemployed with an extension of benefits to ninety-nine weeks – a provision only to be reduced to fifty- nine weeks by the GOP controlled House, causing over 230,000 unemployed to lose benefits in June 2012.We saw the Lilly Ledbetter Act and the Paycheck Fairness Act , passage of the the Dodd-Frank Act, the Consumer Protection Financial Bureau, the Violence Against Women Act ( blocked by the GOP in the House) and the rescue of the auto industry. In the face of blatant obstructionism on the part of the GOP, there are some things to celebrate.

And one MUST present the picture of what the economy was at the start of this administration in January 2009

After a period of Democratic control , with fiscal controls engaged, a reduced debt level, we had an actual budget surplus, At the end of FY 2000, a Democrat finally not only balanced the budget but handed over at the close of his term, a budget surplus of over $237 billion dollar surplus. By the end of FY 2001 -September 30, 2001, the Bush Administration had already decreased that surplus to  $127 billion, having incurred a $33.52 Billion dollar deficit by year’s end – ( source- CNN Money and other sources ).  Through fiscal policies which included unpaid for massive tax breaks for the upper 10 % of income earners ( costing to date over 2 trillion dollars ), an unpaid for wars in two theatres  (in Iraq alone the bill was $829 billion, covered by loans to the Overseas Contingency Fund ) and unpaid for pharmaceutical plans, the previous Republican administration  added 71.9 % to the national debt,  bringing the debt to over $11.2 trillion dollars. This was the fiscal starting point in January 2009.

On the other side of the coin is the GOP presumptive nominee. This is a  highly successful venture capital business executive who specialized in take over profiteering to gain hundreds of millions in profits. Acknowledging there were a number of companies who succeeded under Bain Capital, many were destroyed and the taxpayer was left holding the bag for pension funds. Is this the type of model we wish for government ? Remember Hoover and his business model ! This is a candidate who is already on record as unequivocally supporting the Ryan Budget Plan- one which would eliminate Medicare and replace it with a “Supportive Voucher” plan, forcing seniors to go to the private insurance market for coverage ; one which would cut Medicaid by $810 Billion and block grant it to the states with the provision to opt out entirely. A plan, which according to the CBO, would in fact add over $240 billion to the debt. A plan which would make permanent the Bush era tax breaks (costing to date over $2 trillion in revenue ), sacrificing even more revenue at a time when it is needed he most. And one needs to ask the question, do we want someone in the White House who wants to eliminate EPA, Commerce and Education ? One who at one time supported universal health care with the individual mandate but now is adamantly opposed ?  One who believes that if you can’t afford college, shop around for a cheaper style of education ? One who believes that the auto industry should have been left to crash into bankruptcy ?  Should government be all about profits? And all this while maintaining Cayman Island and European bank accounts to avoid paying taxes.

It should be clear where this will go and I fear that, paired with widespread political ignorance and wholesale misinformation flooding the media, along with an extremist far right anti government mentality gaining more and more traction,  this nation will continue down a road to perdition. But that’s my take and, in the end, the decision is up to each individual voter and huge money special interests notwithstanding, that still remains the CHOICE !