After reading the details of the recent tax cut bill negotiated by the President with the Republiicans, not including any House or Senate Democrat, passed by the Senate yesterday and awaiting a vote today in the House, I've come to the conclusion on the balance sheet of the bill.
For the weatlthy and corporatioins, millions. For the common citizen, you know you and me, a few dollars. For the future generations who will get the bill, priceless, not because its value can be calcuated, but the opposite, it's can't and will be billions upon billions compounded on itself with this year's budget deficit into the long term national debt, now approaching $15 Tillion and risng fast.
And no thanks to you Mr. President. When Democrats have historically shown to be the more fiscally conservate and financially smarter of the parties, you have become a Republican, spend more, give big tax cuts and put it on the government's credit card.
In short the President, while writing us checks for a few dollars, fucked us royally for decades to come when our children and grandchildren get the bill.
That's not what and who I voted for in 2008. He's not the President of the 2008 campaign. He's forgotten every promise for his own self-preservation and now for his own re-election in 2012. But little does he see outside Washington DC that the people are pissed.
Yes, he saw it with the Tea Party and he saw it recently, for the second time, whining at and about the progressives in the Democratic party. He did it after the passiage of the Healthcare Reform Act when he jettisoned the public option at the first hesitation by the Republicans. Despite all his words and promises, he never really believed in the public option.
Now he's done with the tax cuts, negotiating in secret with Republicans like they're the one you want to support. You gave them everything they wanted in exchange for the critical needs of families who are unemployed, are barely surviving financially, and need more help than the wealthy or corporations.
The President said the were concessions now for concessions the Republicans will give him later. Are you really that stupid? Do you really think they'll concede anything in the future, or will stand there as the party of no and demand more for the wealthy and corporations agian, like they did now and you gave them?
Now we've all come to see who and what you really are, a Republican. You're war hawk. You're fanatical over protecting the Defense Department against real and necessary budget and weapons systems cuts. And you'll end up giving the wealthy and corporations more tax cuts than ole' GW Bush himself, and do it quicker.
With the President's negotiation directly with the Republican leadership, not including Democrats let alone us, the public, you have lost my support and vote for 2012. I will not do either for you, period. I won't vote for a Republican, but I don't have to vote for you. I can and will give you my vote of no confidence.
Mr. President, you have the power of your office. I only have the power of the voting booth, and I can and will exercise that in 2012. So, after getting fucked by you, and would love to say, as the adage goes, go fuck yourself, I won't but I will walk away from you and everything you say anymore. You're a fraud worse than Bush himself.
He was transparent in his words and actions. That I'll give him. But you lied in 2008 and have decieved us since. We're wiser now to see who and what you really are. You shouldn't fear the Republicans now to 2012, but fear your own party and your own base. You may still have many who will forgive you for the few dollars in tax cuts, but enough will not stand for or with you then.
That is my promise to you, and I'm not running for my job so I don't have to lie.
Friday, December 17, 2010
Saturday, December 11, 2010
Getting the Facts
Getting the facts, straight that is. Reading the story about the Portland man who tried to denoate a truck bomb near a downtown mall at a public event. The man, a Muslim, had expressed anger at America and wanted to killed Americans. This hate speech is not new, it's been with this country it's entire existence. But what's different under the Obama administration is the focus of the FBI on one group of people, Muslims.
This is not new to the FBI. They've historically focused on the most prominent group expressing hate and violence. In the 1960's it was the KKK and the blacks. In the 1980 and 1990's it was the gangs from Central and South America. Of late it's been Mexican cartels. But they've never been more agressive about seizing on the hate and recruiting individual(s) to commit "act of terrorism" than Muslims.
The case in Portland proves a point. If the young man was white, maybe even a christian, would the FBI have engaged in the acts to entrap him into the crime? After all, the FBI used an undercover agent (disguised as a radical Muslim) to communicate with him, then help him, then provide the resources, and then just waited knowing the bomb was a dud and they would catch a "terrorist" in the act.
It makes me wonder where they failed with the Times Square bomber, who was so inept that the bomb failed to denotate and he left the keys to the SUV with the registration in the glove box. If the bomb had detonated, where would the FBI be in identifying and catching him? Probably nowhere at worst and trying to get extradition of him from Yemen at best. He would have succeeded without the FBI's help.
And where were they then?
The FBI, with NSA's help intercepting communications in/out of this country and how they identified him, was able to build a terrorist. They've done this over and over with all the case of under Bush and now Obama. But all of those people were radical Muslims. And where, prey tell, is the FBI with other racial, ethnic or religious groups? We don't hear about those sting or entrapment cases.
Why is that?
Maybe because it's not news of terrorism or about terrorists? And maybe because the FBI only considers everyone who's not a Muslim just another extremist and not a terrorist? But aren't their goals and plans the same? And aren't they often better prepared, have the resources and have the plans? They don't need the FBI to build them into extremists and more so terrorists.
They already are and are just trying to stay under the radar, except they can't and aren't. The FBI already knows all about these groups, like the white racist militias during the 2008 election. They faded from the media because the FBI and Justice Dept. didn't make a big public spectacle of them. Why is that?
Because they don't relate to mainstream America's hate for Muslims over 9/11. Yet we're not mad at Saudi Arabia. After all most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi citizens and the rest from Yemen and other countries, but not Iraq or Afghanistan. But they were radical Muslims.
And so the FBI can use that fear of and hate for them as a media tool to show they're protecting America and Americans. They didn't do the same for the Oklahoma City bomber. Why? Because he was a white devout Catholic? And the FBI wouldn't and didn't want to antagonize Catholics to call them radicals and terrorists? Like the IRA maybe?
You can go through history and find every racial, ethnic and religious groups have had terrorists among them for periods of time. You can even call some actions of governments terrorism when they use overwhelming force against innocent civilians needlessly. Look at what Israel did in southern Lebanon after the kidnapping of two border guards by Hezbolah. Two border guards and Israel used new US-provided cluster bombs on innocent rural populations.
But that's wandering from the point here. We need to stop focusing our anger and hate in response to radical Muslims. And we need to get the FBI to conduct investigations against these people similar to other racial, ethnic or religious groups. Our FBI can't discriminate this way.
They could have simply kept this man under surveillence and then arrested him when he was about to commit a crime. They would have learned more about who else may be involved than just going after him. As it stands, they sent the message how they operate, who they target, and how much anger and hate they have against Muslims.
And now we've learned again they've infiltrated innocent Muslim groups suspecting them of inciting the anger and hate. Like radical Christian leader don't incite anger and hate about President Obama and our government? It's the same words and same intent. But we know the Muslim don't as most Christian leaders don't incite anger or hate.
So why assume all Muslims guilty and then go searching for proof? And if you can't find it, create it.
I have no misperceptions that extremist groups are engaged in acts of terrorism against Americans. But they didn't necessarily start this as many are angry at our government's international and global economic policies and practices. We invaded Iraq for no reason (only lies). We made the creation of Al Qaeda in Iraq possible (they weren't there before).
We help Israel in the suppression and oppression of people in the Gaza and the West Bank. We are allies with Saudi Arabia in most of the most repression governments in the middle East. Our history in the Middle East goes back to post-WW II with the British. We have occupied many of the countries in the Middle East, often supporting dictators (the Shah of Iran and even Saddham Hussein). for decades.
Our actions has caused them to have anger and hate towards us. So we're not necessarily entirely innocent victim here.
In other words they found reasons in our actions when those actions effected their lands and people. That isn't reason, however, for the FBI's actions. There are better and less public ways they could have used than make a public spectacle of a non-event (since they knew the bomb was fake) simply because he was a Muslim.
We need the FBI to be racially, ethnicly and religious neutral about threats to America and Americans and not presuppose one group guilty so far as create extremists and more so terrorist simply for media attention.
This is not new to the FBI. They've historically focused on the most prominent group expressing hate and violence. In the 1960's it was the KKK and the blacks. In the 1980 and 1990's it was the gangs from Central and South America. Of late it's been Mexican cartels. But they've never been more agressive about seizing on the hate and recruiting individual(s) to commit "act of terrorism" than Muslims.
The case in Portland proves a point. If the young man was white, maybe even a christian, would the FBI have engaged in the acts to entrap him into the crime? After all, the FBI used an undercover agent (disguised as a radical Muslim) to communicate with him, then help him, then provide the resources, and then just waited knowing the bomb was a dud and they would catch a "terrorist" in the act.
It makes me wonder where they failed with the Times Square bomber, who was so inept that the bomb failed to denotate and he left the keys to the SUV with the registration in the glove box. If the bomb had detonated, where would the FBI be in identifying and catching him? Probably nowhere at worst and trying to get extradition of him from Yemen at best. He would have succeeded without the FBI's help.
And where were they then?
The FBI, with NSA's help intercepting communications in/out of this country and how they identified him, was able to build a terrorist. They've done this over and over with all the case of under Bush and now Obama. But all of those people were radical Muslims. And where, prey tell, is the FBI with other racial, ethnic or religious groups? We don't hear about those sting or entrapment cases.
Why is that?
Maybe because it's not news of terrorism or about terrorists? And maybe because the FBI only considers everyone who's not a Muslim just another extremist and not a terrorist? But aren't their goals and plans the same? And aren't they often better prepared, have the resources and have the plans? They don't need the FBI to build them into extremists and more so terrorists.
They already are and are just trying to stay under the radar, except they can't and aren't. The FBI already knows all about these groups, like the white racist militias during the 2008 election. They faded from the media because the FBI and Justice Dept. didn't make a big public spectacle of them. Why is that?
Because they don't relate to mainstream America's hate for Muslims over 9/11. Yet we're not mad at Saudi Arabia. After all most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi citizens and the rest from Yemen and other countries, but not Iraq or Afghanistan. But they were radical Muslims.
And so the FBI can use that fear of and hate for them as a media tool to show they're protecting America and Americans. They didn't do the same for the Oklahoma City bomber. Why? Because he was a white devout Catholic? And the FBI wouldn't and didn't want to antagonize Catholics to call them radicals and terrorists? Like the IRA maybe?
You can go through history and find every racial, ethnic and religious groups have had terrorists among them for periods of time. You can even call some actions of governments terrorism when they use overwhelming force against innocent civilians needlessly. Look at what Israel did in southern Lebanon after the kidnapping of two border guards by Hezbolah. Two border guards and Israel used new US-provided cluster bombs on innocent rural populations.
But that's wandering from the point here. We need to stop focusing our anger and hate in response to radical Muslims. And we need to get the FBI to conduct investigations against these people similar to other racial, ethnic or religious groups. Our FBI can't discriminate this way.
They could have simply kept this man under surveillence and then arrested him when he was about to commit a crime. They would have learned more about who else may be involved than just going after him. As it stands, they sent the message how they operate, who they target, and how much anger and hate they have against Muslims.
And now we've learned again they've infiltrated innocent Muslim groups suspecting them of inciting the anger and hate. Like radical Christian leader don't incite anger and hate about President Obama and our government? It's the same words and same intent. But we know the Muslim don't as most Christian leaders don't incite anger or hate.
So why assume all Muslims guilty and then go searching for proof? And if you can't find it, create it.
I have no misperceptions that extremist groups are engaged in acts of terrorism against Americans. But they didn't necessarily start this as many are angry at our government's international and global economic policies and practices. We invaded Iraq for no reason (only lies). We made the creation of Al Qaeda in Iraq possible (they weren't there before).
We help Israel in the suppression and oppression of people in the Gaza and the West Bank. We are allies with Saudi Arabia in most of the most repression governments in the middle East. Our history in the Middle East goes back to post-WW II with the British. We have occupied many of the countries in the Middle East, often supporting dictators (the Shah of Iran and even Saddham Hussein). for decades.
Our actions has caused them to have anger and hate towards us. So we're not necessarily entirely innocent victim here.
In other words they found reasons in our actions when those actions effected their lands and people. That isn't reason, however, for the FBI's actions. There are better and less public ways they could have used than make a public spectacle of a non-event (since they knew the bomb was fake) simply because he was a Muslim.
We need the FBI to be racially, ethnicly and religious neutral about threats to America and Americans and not presuppose one group guilty so far as create extremists and more so terrorist simply for media attention.
Friday, December 10, 2010
Let the Tax Cuts Expire
Here's a novel idea. Why not let all the tax cuts expire. Every single one of them. And then reduce the tax deductions in the corporate, business and personal income tax for everyone too. Maybe it's time we bit the bullet and paid our way into the future instead of the continual hope, and political promises, that we can and will grow our way out of the budget deficit and national debt.
As we've seen with Clinton we can keep taxes higher and grow the economy. And we've seen under Bush the exact opposite. We not we can't balance the budget with tax cuts, not with paying for the interest on the debt, two wars, entitlements, military operations and capitol investment, and discretionary spending. We can't balance the budget on the 15% of the discretionary spending.
We have to look at the two wars, our international military commitments, the Department of Defense (DOD) operations budget, the DOD weapons systems and equipment replacement programs and our DOD contracts. The DOD clearly has to reduce it's total budget by 15-20% as a goal over 3-5 years. And then do it again then. It's that's simple. We can't keep spending more on the DOD than all the other countries in the world combined.
And we have to look at increasing revenue to the Social Security Trust Fund Congress keeps raiding for money. We need to restore the Trust Fund and then get new money into it. Several ways come to mind initially. First, raise the income ceiling for all contributors by simply removing the ceiling. All income faces this tax.
Second, make all working undocmented workers and illegal immigrants citizens under an amensty program with optional contributions for past employment and credit. This will get rid of employers hiring them under false pretenses for cheap labor. It's makes them part of being Americans and American workers. And we get their income tax too.
Third, limit social security payments to rich people who have retirement anuities and post-retirement income above a threshold of say $75-100K. After all they don't need the extra income despite paying into it. It's their fair share to others during their working years. It's time the rich paid into it for everyone.
All of these, as some economists have noted, would make the Trust Fund solvent for quite a few decades and longer. And we don't have to reduce entitlements except maybe looking at the small percentage of fraud. Money not paid to one false claimant is money to one earned claimant.
I say this because as a federal retiree I can't get both without compensating my federal annuity. Even if I qualify for it (still short about a year-plus of credit) my annuity will be reduced the corresponding amount of the Social Security payment, meaning I can't get any more money over a ceiling despite paying into both systems. And if I can't, those wealthy shouldn't either.
We have to look at the discretionary spending but more with an eye for programs better down at the state or local level. I'm for the federal government doing the big and national work and support those programs benefitting the nation as a whole. There isn't much waste in the non-military discretionary programs, but there are some better served by corporations, businesses, states and local efforts.
It's clearly we have over-commited our federal government to too many programs, but I think if we tackle the former solutions (DOD, SSN, taxes, etc.) we can keep if not add to the discretionary programs to help everyone in the areas of healthcare (like adding a public option), education, environmental protection, agriculture, consumer protection, and so on down the list of work which clearly needs more money.
We have to look at healthcare costs. The Healthcare Reform Act didn't do this. It didn't and won't address costs which it handed to the for profit corporations in the healthcare and health insurance industry. They're still in control except for those states which have oversight commissions. We need to deal with and resolve costs to save Medicare, save families, and save taxpayers.
We have to look not at providing healthcare but look at where the extra money is going or wasted and then also look finding ways to control overall costs and all increases. If corporations can impose "managed care", we can impose "managed costs" to keep both sides on the same plane and minimize the problems and excessive costs.
We have to look at our international commitments both military aid and bases and aid programs. Sadly, maybe we need to tell the world, for a while anyway, we simply can't afford to help everyone. We've seen this in Afghanistan as billions are wasted to corruption and profiteering.
We have to look at getting corporations back to the US to put their taxes into our government. We should find ways to encourage them to return and discourage overseas headquarter to evade US taxes. If they want the US consumer, then they will pay the taxes appropriately. And if they don't move back, then restrict their access in the US as a "foreign" company. And then make them pay accordingly.
And as a demonstration to the American people, Congress need to rein in its own spending in several ways. Freeze the salaries and benefits for the same length of time they freeze the salaries of federal workers. Freeze their total funds for their office similarly to their salary freeze. And then freeze the White House funds too. Show solidarity with the rest of us.
In short as has been noted, we can't balance the budget with tax expiring tax cuts alone, with spending cuts alone, or with growing the economy alone. We need all and more. With a national debt of $50,000 per person and growing we can't afford not to seriously get us on the road to financial solvency with not only at least a balanced budget but also paying down the national debt.
It's our only hope and future. We've maxed out the government credit card. We can't just get a new one, but it's time we decided as a nation and a people to do this in the lifetime of our children and grandchildren. We're so far in debt we can't see the sky anymore, and it's time we stood on solid, level financial ground, and we need to start with the real sacrifices, not political ones or surficial ones.
So, not only let all the tax cuts expire, let's look at adding new taxes, cutting DOD spending and other measures any household would do to get solvent. We're the family and we've mortaging future generations farther than we can see anymore, and we know they won't be able to pay. Let's restore hope they can with our sacrifices now.
As we've seen with Clinton we can keep taxes higher and grow the economy. And we've seen under Bush the exact opposite. We not we can't balance the budget with tax cuts, not with paying for the interest on the debt, two wars, entitlements, military operations and capitol investment, and discretionary spending. We can't balance the budget on the 15% of the discretionary spending.
We have to look at the two wars, our international military commitments, the Department of Defense (DOD) operations budget, the DOD weapons systems and equipment replacement programs and our DOD contracts. The DOD clearly has to reduce it's total budget by 15-20% as a goal over 3-5 years. And then do it again then. It's that's simple. We can't keep spending more on the DOD than all the other countries in the world combined.
And we have to look at increasing revenue to the Social Security Trust Fund Congress keeps raiding for money. We need to restore the Trust Fund and then get new money into it. Several ways come to mind initially. First, raise the income ceiling for all contributors by simply removing the ceiling. All income faces this tax.
Second, make all working undocmented workers and illegal immigrants citizens under an amensty program with optional contributions for past employment and credit. This will get rid of employers hiring them under false pretenses for cheap labor. It's makes them part of being Americans and American workers. And we get their income tax too.
Third, limit social security payments to rich people who have retirement anuities and post-retirement income above a threshold of say $75-100K. After all they don't need the extra income despite paying into it. It's their fair share to others during their working years. It's time the rich paid into it for everyone.
All of these, as some economists have noted, would make the Trust Fund solvent for quite a few decades and longer. And we don't have to reduce entitlements except maybe looking at the small percentage of fraud. Money not paid to one false claimant is money to one earned claimant.
I say this because as a federal retiree I can't get both without compensating my federal annuity. Even if I qualify for it (still short about a year-plus of credit) my annuity will be reduced the corresponding amount of the Social Security payment, meaning I can't get any more money over a ceiling despite paying into both systems. And if I can't, those wealthy shouldn't either.
We have to look at the discretionary spending but more with an eye for programs better down at the state or local level. I'm for the federal government doing the big and national work and support those programs benefitting the nation as a whole. There isn't much waste in the non-military discretionary programs, but there are some better served by corporations, businesses, states and local efforts.
It's clearly we have over-commited our federal government to too many programs, but I think if we tackle the former solutions (DOD, SSN, taxes, etc.) we can keep if not add to the discretionary programs to help everyone in the areas of healthcare (like adding a public option), education, environmental protection, agriculture, consumer protection, and so on down the list of work which clearly needs more money.
We have to look at healthcare costs. The Healthcare Reform Act didn't do this. It didn't and won't address costs which it handed to the for profit corporations in the healthcare and health insurance industry. They're still in control except for those states which have oversight commissions. We need to deal with and resolve costs to save Medicare, save families, and save taxpayers.
We have to look not at providing healthcare but look at where the extra money is going or wasted and then also look finding ways to control overall costs and all increases. If corporations can impose "managed care", we can impose "managed costs" to keep both sides on the same plane and minimize the problems and excessive costs.
We have to look at our international commitments both military aid and bases and aid programs. Sadly, maybe we need to tell the world, for a while anyway, we simply can't afford to help everyone. We've seen this in Afghanistan as billions are wasted to corruption and profiteering.
We have to look at getting corporations back to the US to put their taxes into our government. We should find ways to encourage them to return and discourage overseas headquarter to evade US taxes. If they want the US consumer, then they will pay the taxes appropriately. And if they don't move back, then restrict their access in the US as a "foreign" company. And then make them pay accordingly.
And as a demonstration to the American people, Congress need to rein in its own spending in several ways. Freeze the salaries and benefits for the same length of time they freeze the salaries of federal workers. Freeze their total funds for their office similarly to their salary freeze. And then freeze the White House funds too. Show solidarity with the rest of us.
In short as has been noted, we can't balance the budget with tax expiring tax cuts alone, with spending cuts alone, or with growing the economy alone. We need all and more. With a national debt of $50,000 per person and growing we can't afford not to seriously get us on the road to financial solvency with not only at least a balanced budget but also paying down the national debt.
It's our only hope and future. We've maxed out the government credit card. We can't just get a new one, but it's time we decided as a nation and a people to do this in the lifetime of our children and grandchildren. We're so far in debt we can't see the sky anymore, and it's time we stood on solid, level financial ground, and we need to start with the real sacrifices, not political ones or surficial ones.
So, not only let all the tax cuts expire, let's look at adding new taxes, cutting DOD spending and other measures any household would do to get solvent. We're the family and we've mortaging future generations farther than we can see anymore, and we know they won't be able to pay. Let's restore hope they can with our sacrifices now.
Thursday, December 9, 2010
Lessre of Evils
The progressive and liberal Democrats have learned a few lessons this week with President Obama's negotiation with the Republicans over extending the Bush-era (2001 and 2003) tax cuts. They learned not to trust President Obama anymore. They kinda' knew this from the healthcare negotiations when he jettisoned the much needed and wanted public option and then he whined about the progressives and liberals for "not reading the detials" of the whole bill.
They learned the President will give away almost every good bargaining chip the Democrats have to get what he and not the Democrats think is a good deal. The deals turn out to be a very poison pill, giving key and important issues to the Republicans and getting lesser issues for the Republicans. They learned Obama would rather capitulate than fight. Apparently the President doesn't understand his one big chip, being President.
They learned he doesn't know how to be president and how to act to get effective and meaningful laws for America and the American people beyond what the Republicans will agree to. In short, Obama is intelligent but not smart. He is bright but not wise. And he lets others have more power and make decisions for him. Not a good president in my book.
And he is not loyal to his word. All the promises he made in the 2008 campaign are, as the song goes, "Dust in the Wind" and lost to political history on how to win a base and then forget them in office.
The Democrats also learned that with the President from now on, he is and will be the lesser of evils. He's not on the side of Democrats anymore. He's said as much as he's the President for America and Americans. Except he has conveniently forgotten where he came from and who got him elected. The progressive and liberal Democrats and independents. We've not only been swept out the door, but the President has yelled at us twice now in public from his podium.
They, and we, have learned he not going to stand up for us anymore beyond what the Republicans will agree to, which is nothing.
The President will learn the lesson, however, which he overlooked when he agreed to this bill with the Republicans. It will add $700 Billion to the budget deficit and national debt. On his watch. And the Republicans will surely hit him hard on this in 2012, despite being party to the the bill. They will argue the tax cuts didn't increase both but it was all the other costs.
The President doesn't seem to see, let alone understand, the Republicans don't see tax cuts and loss of income to the government and adding to any deficit and debt. They're intentionally bilnd and deaf to words tying tax cuts to debt. They see it as money earned by the people and stolen by the government.
It's why they called the tax bonuses to the rich as tax cuts for everyone. They see all of the tax cuts as one and not separate issues between all of us, remember we all earn under $250K, and the rich. The Republicans are all-inclusive when it comes to people, rich and poor alike. But that's not their goal, but the richest 2-3% of Americans earning more than $250K.
The Democrats learned the President also seems to see things this way. He would rather add $140 Billion to the national debt over the next 2 years than fight for protecting Americans from this debt. And he'll see the Republicans will bring this back in the 2012 campaign by calling him for raising the debt that same debt.
And he'll stand there and have to take it as that's exactly what he did, and then explain it to us, ordinary Americans who recite his own words. We have also learned, again, what the Democrats learned this week. President Obama lied. All politicians lie, but he was to bring "Hope and Change" to Washington. We learned those were empty words.
And so we saw another lesson in typical presidential politics, not what we were promised. We saw the emperor has no clothes made by the ordinary people, but by the rich. He's the very person he fought against in the campaign, and he now wears the clothes proudly and denounces the ordinary folks like us.
Maybe he should look at his campaign speeches again. We remember his words but apparently he's deliberately chosen them.
They learned the President will give away almost every good bargaining chip the Democrats have to get what he and not the Democrats think is a good deal. The deals turn out to be a very poison pill, giving key and important issues to the Republicans and getting lesser issues for the Republicans. They learned Obama would rather capitulate than fight. Apparently the President doesn't understand his one big chip, being President.
They learned he doesn't know how to be president and how to act to get effective and meaningful laws for America and the American people beyond what the Republicans will agree to. In short, Obama is intelligent but not smart. He is bright but not wise. And he lets others have more power and make decisions for him. Not a good president in my book.
And he is not loyal to his word. All the promises he made in the 2008 campaign are, as the song goes, "Dust in the Wind" and lost to political history on how to win a base and then forget them in office.
The Democrats also learned that with the President from now on, he is and will be the lesser of evils. He's not on the side of Democrats anymore. He's said as much as he's the President for America and Americans. Except he has conveniently forgotten where he came from and who got him elected. The progressive and liberal Democrats and independents. We've not only been swept out the door, but the President has yelled at us twice now in public from his podium.
They, and we, have learned he not going to stand up for us anymore beyond what the Republicans will agree to, which is nothing.
The President will learn the lesson, however, which he overlooked when he agreed to this bill with the Republicans. It will add $700 Billion to the budget deficit and national debt. On his watch. And the Republicans will surely hit him hard on this in 2012, despite being party to the the bill. They will argue the tax cuts didn't increase both but it was all the other costs.
The President doesn't seem to see, let alone understand, the Republicans don't see tax cuts and loss of income to the government and adding to any deficit and debt. They're intentionally bilnd and deaf to words tying tax cuts to debt. They see it as money earned by the people and stolen by the government.
It's why they called the tax bonuses to the rich as tax cuts for everyone. They see all of the tax cuts as one and not separate issues between all of us, remember we all earn under $250K, and the rich. The Republicans are all-inclusive when it comes to people, rich and poor alike. But that's not their goal, but the richest 2-3% of Americans earning more than $250K.
The Democrats learned the President also seems to see things this way. He would rather add $140 Billion to the national debt over the next 2 years than fight for protecting Americans from this debt. And he'll see the Republicans will bring this back in the 2012 campaign by calling him for raising the debt that same debt.
And he'll stand there and have to take it as that's exactly what he did, and then explain it to us, ordinary Americans who recite his own words. We have also learned, again, what the Democrats learned this week. President Obama lied. All politicians lie, but he was to bring "Hope and Change" to Washington. We learned those were empty words.
And so we saw another lesson in typical presidential politics, not what we were promised. We saw the emperor has no clothes made by the ordinary people, but by the rich. He's the very person he fought against in the campaign, and he now wears the clothes proudly and denounces the ordinary folks like us.
Maybe he should look at his campaign speeches again. We remember his words but apparently he's deliberately chosen them.
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
We're not the enemy
Mr. President, we, the Democrats - your base remember, aren't the political enemy. The Republicans are your political enemy. You negotiate with us, the progressive liberal base, and you argue with the Republicans. You don't do the reverse. You hate us for having ideals but not the Republicans for having their ideals. You didn't fight for and with us, but fought against us.
You sold us down the river for political compromise with the Republicans. Then you expressed your anger at us as you did before for nothing. The public option would have been good for everyone making health insurance competitive with the government's plan. Tax bonuses for the wealthy is wrong for America. More tax deductions and breaks for the wealthly and corporations aren't good for America and Americans.
And all these you said we're wrong because we won't compromise on our principles. Yet you will compromise your principles for the Republicans who hold their principles. We're not the enemy here and you keep treating us as is if were and are. And you expect us to support you in 2012? You're kidding, right?
The Republicans know that you will cave at the slightest sign of their obstinence over bills. They know that because you have caved every time while jettisoning the promises you gave us in 2008. And now you jettisoned us because we disagree with you and want to hold you accountable. What?
You have moved so far right, you're no longer a real Democrat. You're not even a centrists. You're a center-right President slowly becoming Republican with moments of Democrat-leaning ideas. You give us words while giving the Republicans results. And you expect us to be happy with you?
And it's easy to see, at least we see it, tax breaks and tax cuts won't solve the budget deficit and national debt. And it's easy to see you'll be hammered by the Republicans, Tea Party, the conservative PAC's, etal over both, increasing the same way they did in 2010 against the Democrats in the House and Senate. It's obvious to eveyone except you and your staff.
So why do you continue to say the Republicans will negotiate in good faith in the next Congress? Are you really that naive? I don't think so, but why do you keep proving you are? And why do you keep yelling at us and being nice to Republicans? Do you really think we won't equally be angry at you as you are with us?
We're not your enemy, and if you don't stop treating us as if we are, then we will make it clear to you what we can do in 2012. I hope you're ready for opposition. Or do you think we'll "read the details", as you say, and forgive you? If so, then you really are naive. And you'll be pushed from both sides, the Republicans you seem to love but hate you and us you seem to hate and will return the favor.
And all your words won't undo your past and your words spoken, especially at and about us. We have memories and will remind you. Loudly.
You sold us down the river for political compromise with the Republicans. Then you expressed your anger at us as you did before for nothing. The public option would have been good for everyone making health insurance competitive with the government's plan. Tax bonuses for the wealthy is wrong for America. More tax deductions and breaks for the wealthly and corporations aren't good for America and Americans.
And all these you said we're wrong because we won't compromise on our principles. Yet you will compromise your principles for the Republicans who hold their principles. We're not the enemy here and you keep treating us as is if were and are. And you expect us to support you in 2012? You're kidding, right?
The Republicans know that you will cave at the slightest sign of their obstinence over bills. They know that because you have caved every time while jettisoning the promises you gave us in 2008. And now you jettisoned us because we disagree with you and want to hold you accountable. What?
You have moved so far right, you're no longer a real Democrat. You're not even a centrists. You're a center-right President slowly becoming Republican with moments of Democrat-leaning ideas. You give us words while giving the Republicans results. And you expect us to be happy with you?
And it's easy to see, at least we see it, tax breaks and tax cuts won't solve the budget deficit and national debt. And it's easy to see you'll be hammered by the Republicans, Tea Party, the conservative PAC's, etal over both, increasing the same way they did in 2010 against the Democrats in the House and Senate. It's obvious to eveyone except you and your staff.
So why do you continue to say the Republicans will negotiate in good faith in the next Congress? Are you really that naive? I don't think so, but why do you keep proving you are? And why do you keep yelling at us and being nice to Republicans? Do you really think we won't equally be angry at you as you are with us?
We're not your enemy, and if you don't stop treating us as if we are, then we will make it clear to you what we can do in 2012. I hope you're ready for opposition. Or do you think we'll "read the details", as you say, and forgive you? If so, then you really are naive. And you'll be pushed from both sides, the Republicans you seem to love but hate you and us you seem to hate and will return the favor.
And all your words won't undo your past and your words spoken, especially at and about us. We have memories and will remind you. Loudly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
