Notes From A Liberal

Enough, Already

2021-04-19T08:45:00.003-06:00

After 2540 posts of political thoughts it is time to say enough, already. While I seriously doubt if my opinion influenced any significant (or insignificant, for that matter) political decision it help me deal with the frustration felt by the incompetence of Presidents when it came to either solving problems facing the country or, even as important as signing bills that offered solutions, having an ability to convince the necessary numbers of members of Congress the necessity of their proposed solutions. A certain part of this frustration can still be found with members of Congress who insist on putting party ahead of the country. Also, frustrating is the amount and costs of legislation aimed at solutions in search of a problem. But from today forward, it will no longer be my role in life to speak out unless the demand to continue is such that I cannot refuse. For all who read my posts and agreed with my I give my thanks but have to ask why none of you did anything to help change things. A democracy cannot depend upon a "single voice in the wilderness" but needs to hear from all voices.

F@#K OFF!!!

2021-04-18T07:54:00.005-06:00

Mitch McConnell, apparently upset because a vast majority of Americans not only approve of the job Joe Biden is doing as President, also upset because again a significant number of Americans voiced approval for Biden’s proposed legislation, and finally upset because many Americans, including “corporate” America disapprove of the Georgia election legislation stated that the executives who signed letters objecting to legislation in Georgia and proposed in Texas and Arizona that has focused on making it difficult for a number of minorities to vote lashed out. This may have been the most ridiculous moment in McConnell’s career where he said that the CEOs should not speak of their objections to the legislation but should keep making political contributions. The only reason so much corporate money finds its way into the campaign coffers is to enable contributors to influence passage of legislation. The next time a Republican solicits a contribution hopefully the CEO or other corporate executive will tell them to just F@#k OFF! I can think of no better response to such an asinine statement by an elected political leader.

Can’t, Don’t, or Won’t?

2021-04-17T08:07:00.006-06:00

What is it with Republicans and the art of governing? Is the problem Republicans just can’t govern or, Republicans just don’t govern once in office, or Republicans just won’t govern? Actually is is probably a combination of all three coupled with a complete disdain on the part of Republicans for fact and truth. Going back to the Reagan Administration and “trickle down” economics Republicans seem to have forgotten how important actual facts are when it comes to making important decisions. The Republican approach appears to be first find a solution and then find a problem to which that solution can be applied. Any facts that disprove the existence of a problem are to be ignored as are any negative thoughts about whether or not there is a problem actually in need of solutions. Republicans can’t appear to govern when the problems involve people with low wealth. Government cannot help people escape from poverty or attain better economic lives with government help because people in need of government help are not Republicans with Republican ability to succeed and Republican desire to succeed. People whho need help will rely on government and never “pull themselves up by the bootstraps” in the mind of a Republican. Republicans don’t govern because in the minds of Republicans it is not in Republican interests. Governing in the minds of Republicans involves the focus of all solutions to all problems on those who need the solutions the least not the most. For one thing, it is easier. For another focusing on those who are most in need require knowing facts which, in the world of Republicans is a no, no. In addition, governing Republican style means only helping people who can help re-elect Republicans. The poor, the elderly, children, jobless, are all groups that cannot donate nor will ever donate to a political campaign. Why should a Republican offer solutions to problems faced by people who will not give support in return for help. Republicans just won’t govern because to do so requires both physical and mental effort. Republicans are lazy. Republicans seek elective office so they don’t have to work very hard. Republicans believe they “work smart” not work hard which is why they are in office. Republicans do not believe in governing and will never believe in governing and if nothing else, this is a lesson taught by Trump and Reagan.

Of Course!

2021-04-16T08:24:00.006-06:00

As soon as a Democrat took the White House, Republicans instantly did another 180-degree turn on budget deficits the G.O.P. went from hyperventilating about debt as an existential threat during the Obama years to complete indifference about deficits under Donald Trump. Surely nobody is surprised to see Republicans immediately revert to deficit hysteria now that Joe Biden is president Shouldn’t politicians who claim to be terribly worried about the future of America’s children support, you know, actually helping America’s children today? That’s not a hypothetical question. Democrats are reportedly working on legislation that would offer monthly payments to most American families with children, and could, among other things, cut child poverty roughly in half. One especially good thing about the legislation in the works is that Democrats finally seem to have broken free of Republican framing, under which every benefit takes the form of a tax credit. This will apparently be a straightforward proposal to send money to qualifying families. Economists have shown that previous extensions of aid to families with children, like the gradual rollout of food stamps in the 1960s and 1970s and the expansion of Medicaid in the 1980s, didn’t just improve children’s lives in the short run; children who received the aid grew into healthier, more productive adults than those who didn’t receive the aid. By not doing even more for children, we are stunting their future, and that of the nation as a whole. Independent estimates of the cost of something like the reported Democratic proposal put its price tag at roughly $120 billion a year. To put this in perspective, it’s only about half the 2021 revenue loss caused by the 2017 tax cut. Aid to children would also indirectly help the budget, because those children would later pay more in taxes and be less likely to call on safety net programs. These fiscal benefits might even be big enough that helping children pays for itself, and in any case they mean that the true cost of aiding children, even in narrowly fiscal terms, would be less than it might appear. All in all, then, increased aid to families with children is a really good idea. It would immediately improve millions of Americans’ lives, it would make us stronger in the future, and it would have only modest budget costs. They’ll yell about fiscal responsibility and hope that voters have very short memories. Another answer is that they’ll claim that the Biden administration and its allies have a “radical leftist agenda” — because nothing screams fanatical Marxism like giving kids enough to eat and a roof over their heads — and hope that voters don’t figure out what Democrats are actually proposing. (This goes for much more than child credits: Polls suggest that on issues like taxes and health care, Republicans, not Democrats, are the radicals whose views are out of touch with public opinion.) Standard conservative argument that any policy reducing misery reduces the incentive to be self-sufficient — you know, unemployment insurance encourages people to stay unemployed, food stamps encourage them to be lazy, and so on. Making this argument about a broad-based program to help children will be hard, but they’ll find a way. One unexpected thing, however, is any kind of good-faith argument against aid to families with children. That’s not to say that the Democratic proposal will be perfect; no doubt experts will see ways it could be better. But spending more on children is a very good idea, economically and morally, and should become law.

The Big Oh Shit

2021-04-15T08:05:00.005-06:00

The Republican Party was essentially an enterprise run by and for plutocrats that managed to win elections by playing to the cultural grievances and racial hostility of working-class whites. Bigotry, however, was mainly a show put on for the rubes; the party would go back to its pro-rich priorities as soon as each election was over. Billionaires may have started the Republican Party on its march toward extremism, but they’ve clearly lost control of the forces they conjured up. The G.O.P. can no longer put intolerance back in the closet after each election so as to focus on the real business of tax cuts and deregulation. Instead, the extremists are in charge. Despite a lost election and a violent insurrection, what’s left of the old Republican establishment has abased itself on the altar of Trumpism. But while power in the Republican Party has shifted almost completely away from the conservative establishment, the party is still committed to an economic ideology of tax and spending cuts. For now Republican politicians are doing Democrats a big favor, clinging to discredited economic ideas that even their own supporters dislike. Will the Republican Party find its way out of the Trumpian woods? To do this, Republicans will have to start promoting policy that appeal to a majority of voters. They can no longer depend upon name-calling and labeling Democrats as liberals or socialists to win national elections. The prime issues that served to rally Republicans like abortions and tax cuts have also failed as winning strategies. The American people recognize the country faces serious problems that demand serious solutions. Republican campaigns can no longer afford to be solution free and successful Republican politicians can also no longer be solution free. One lesson Trump taught America is good government is far mor important than small government. One could even say that good government trumps tax cuts as a successful election strategy. And that, for Republicans remains a big OH SHIT!

The Time for Filibuster is Long Past

2021-04-14T07:49:00.000-06:00

Senate Democrats are signaling they will reject an effort by Mitch McConnell to protect the legislative filibuster as part of a deal to run a 50-50 Senate, saying they have little interest in bowing to his demands just hours into their new Senate majority. McConnell has publicly and privately pressed Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer to work to keep the 60-vote threshold on most legislation as part of their power-sharing agreement. Democrats have no plans to gut the filibuster further, but argue it would be a mistake to take one of their tools off the table just as they're about to govern. Many Democrats argue that having the threat of targeting the filibuster will be key to forcing compromise with reluctant Republicans. They also believe it would show weakness to accede to McConnell’s demand as he’s relegated to minority leader. “Chuck Schumer is the majority leader and he should be treated like majority leader. We can get shit done around here and we ought to be focused on getting stuff done,” said Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.). “If we don’t, the inmates are going to be running this ship.” “It would be exactly the wrong way to begin,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.). “We need to have the kind of position of strength that will enable us to get stuff done.” Four years ago, as McConnell himself came under pressure from former President Donald Trump to gut the filibuster, 61 senators signed a letter to Senate leaders emphasizing the importance of protecting the super-majority requirement. And even now Democrats like Sens. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona and Joe Manchin of West Virginia say they want to keep the filibuster, emphasizing that it drives compromise. For that reason, the filibuster appears safe for the immediate future regardless of what happens in the coming days. If Democrats were to change it, it would likely be in response to Republicans blocking their bills repeatedly. And there’s plenty of pent-up angst in the Democratic Party, which is now in control of both chambers of Congress and the White House for the first time in more than a decade. Republicans say that the time to commit to keeping the filibuster is now, not at a moment of political fury over legislation that the minority blocks. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said the GOP simply wants to hear Schumer say “that we’re not going to change the legislative filibuster.” “You want to do it before there’s an emotional, difficult, controversial issue. So that it isn’t issue-driven, it’s institution-driven,” said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who organized the 2017 letter from rank-and-file senators to Schumer and McConnell. The fight over the filibuster holds major consequences, both immediate and into the future. McConnell and Schumer met on Tuesday for a half-hour about how to organize the Senate but came to no resolution. McConnell brought up the filibuster in that meeting, while Schumer argued the Senate should adopt the same rules from the last 50-50 Senate in 2001, which didn’t touch on the 60-vote threshold. The longer the standoff over the organizing package persists, the weirder the Senate will become. New senators have not been added to committees and the ratios have not changed, leaving the GOP in the majority on some panels. That’s already complicating the ability of the Senate to confirm some of President Joe Biden’s nominees. “It’s exactly the opposite of the conversation that we should be having today,” said Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.). “To sort of jade the day of the inauguration and three new senators being sworn in with sort of political hostage-taking is, I think, an indication of how Machiavellian politics around here have become.” Democrats could change the Senate rules to a simple majority with the support of all 50 Senate Democrats as well as Vice President Kamala Harris via the “nuclear option,” or a unilateral rules change. The rules have been changed by a majority three times since 2013, once by Democrats and twice by Republicans — first on gutting the filibuster on most nominations, then on Supreme Court picks and finally to shorten the debate time for some nominees. Changing the legislative filibuster would effectively make the Senate much more like the House, a majoritarian institution. Democrats have not discussed the filibuster impasse with McConnell as a caucus yet, though they are expected to hold a party meeting by phone as soon as Thursday. And several Democrats said they aren’t sure exactly how Schumer will thread the needle with his GOP counterpart. Schumer has repeatedly declined to comment on the talks with McConnell and on the filibuster. Notably, McConnell held firm on keeping the filibuster rule in place even as Trump repeatedly attacked him on Twitter. But Democrats have strong feelings on the subject that will be hard to reconcile with McConnell’s demand. As Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) put it: “I don’t think there is any way that Democrats would find it acceptable to invoke new rules that McConnell certainly never volunteered to abide by himself.” “It’s generally up to the majority as to whether they want to pursue a conversation about changing the rules. And we should reserve that right,” added Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.). “I’m a supporter of filibuster reform, I obviously want to make my case to the caucus when and if that moment arises.” Schumer may be able to satisfy McConnell with something less than a written commitment, perhaps a speech on the Senate floor or a verbal acknowledgement that his preference is not to invoke the nuclear option. But even some Republicans are skeptical that Democrats will give up their leverage so easily and simply trust that Republicans will work with them on legislation. McConnell’s “reasoning is let’s do it now while we’re all in this management mode as opposed to under fire when there’s a burning issue,” said Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.). “I’m skeptical of the outcome. I think Mitch’s effort is noble but I just don’t think it ends there.”

In What World?

2021-04-13T07:23:00.000-06:00

In what world is Joe Manchin living? He recently opined, that passing the For The People Voting Rights Act without Republican backing would overly upset volatile Trump supporters. “The only thing I would caution anybody and everybody about is that we had an insurrection on January 6, because of voting, right? And lack of trust in voting?” Manchin told HuffPost then. “We should not, at all, attempt to do anything that would create more distrust and division.” Joe, What about the real fact that the lack of confidence in voting results totally from fake fraud claims. It’s the definition of pandering. It’s indulging a mass delusion. Most people tell pollsters they think elections are fair. Overall trust in elections has gone up and down over the years, but it’s been much lower among Republicans since Trump’s loss, likely because Trump has falsely claimed the election was stolen. Democratic confidence in election results similarly declined after 2016, but most still said that election had been fair. In his op-ed, Manchin said there is actually bipartisan support in the Senate for many provisions outlined in the For the People Act. The bill doesn’t have a single GOP co-sponsor, but Manchin claims Republicans actually do support many of its provisions. “Efforts to expand voting hours and access, improve our election security and increase transparency in campaign finance and advertisement rules should and do have broad, bipartisan support and would quickly address the needs facing Americans today,” Manchin wrote. “Taking bipartisan action on voting reform would go a long way in restoring the American people’s faith in Congress and our ability to deliver results for them.” Giving wings to a frog would prevent said frog from bumping its ass on the ground as well. Neither will happen in this world. Bipartisanship, Republican style, is exemplified by the 2017 tax cuts which were, like most recent Republican legislation, based upon myths and lies. Republicans are unified around the failure of the Biden Administration. Republicans realize that the policies they promote appeal to a shrinking population and are searching for any means to offset the lack of appeal to a general population. Rather than adopt a policy that American wants, needs, and solves major problems Republicans obstruct and then change voting rule so as to be less penalized by their incompetencies. For Joe Manchin to suggest Republicans are interested in bipartisanship is a myth not unlike trickle down economics. Bipartisanship on the part of Republicans has not happened since the days of Ronald Reagan and will not happen in the future. For Joe Manchin to fail to realize that the concept of Republican bipartisanship is but another myth that does not exist in the real world.

Size, Really?

2021-04-12T07:50:00.002-06:00

Republicans who are critical of Democratic policy constantly talk about small government. From their conversations one might believe that there is a certain size for government to be and anything bigger is bad for the country. But let’s face it; in the case of government size does not matter. What matters is the competence of government that is far more important than size. If the country learned anything from the last Republican/Trump attempts to govern they should have learned that competence is what is needed when it comes to solving problems the country faces. The Trump administration was a textbook example of not only bad, incompetent government but also an example of small government that did not have the necessary resources to deal with any of the country’s problems. The Biden administration has focused on the major problems facing the country that are in need of solutions. In some cases, legislation was passed that will go far towards solving these problems. In many cases, however, more necessary legislation is either pending passage or proposed but is being blocked by the Senate filibuster, a rule that requires 60 votes for passage instead of the simple majority that is required by the Constitution. All but two Democrats in Congress have indicated intent to end the filibuster. Former President Obama and current President Biden have also voiced a need to pass much needed legislation with a simple majority of votes in the Senate. The Senators from West Virginia and Arizona seem to want to ignore the Constitution and continue the tradition of the filibuster in spite of countless examples of the filibuster resulting in incompetent government. Republicans will insist on the need for bipartisanship but have failed time and time again to match their words with actual deeds. There is no reason on earth to think this will change yet the Senator from West Virginia must think he will wake one morning and at least 10 Republicans will be waiting outside of his office to pass legislation that will rebuild the nation’s infrastructure, create jobs, increase corporate taxes to pay some of the costs of both infrastructure maintenance as well as research into better, more efficient infrastructure. Will these same 10 Republican Senators also have solution to the immigration problem? Do you really think there are 10 Republican Senators who will vote to make sure the wealthy pay income tax on all of their income or will recognize the need to eliminate tax shelters and all other schemes for both individuals and corporations to shirk their responsibilities to pay taxes? The Senators from West Virginia and Arizona need to be made aware that competencies far more important than traditions and that the job of the Senate is to write and enact legislation that solves existing problems rather than legislation that is a solution in search of a problem. None of the solutions to the country’s problems have anything to do with the size of government but are all dependent upon good, effective, competent government. Hopefully the country will benefit from learning that lesson from the Trump government.

Make voting harder

2021-04-11T08:31:00.005-06:00

The Georgia law is part of an ongoing effort by the Republican Party to make voting more difficult, mostly because Republicans believe they win when turnout is low. There is no accurate way to describe this effort other than anti-democratic. The Republican Party’s justification is “election integrity” — that is, stopping voter fraud. But voter fraud is exceedingly rare. There is no reason to believe it has determined the outcome of a single U.S. election in decades. If anything, the most high-profile recent examples of fraud have tended to involve Republican voters. Yet former President Donald Trump and other Republicans have repeatedly and falsely claimed otherwise. In truth, the spate of “election integrity” laws over the past decade are mostly a response to Barack Obama’s presidential victories. They created a consensus, among both parties, that Democrats benefited from high turnout (which may not be true). Republicans in many states have responded by trying to make voting harder, especially in cities and heavily Black areas — through onerous identification requirements, reduced voting hours, reduced access to early voting and more. The new Georgia law largely fits this pattern. It is a response by Republican legislators and Gov. Brian Kemp to their party’s close losses there in the 2020 elections. The law reduces hours for absentee voting; increases ID requirements, and limit the distribution of water and food to voters waiting in line. One provision seems obviously targeted at Atlanta, the Democrats’ most important source of votes: a new limit on absentee-ballot drop boxes. It is likely to reduce the number of drop boxes in metropolitan Atlanta to fewer than 25, from 94 last year. “There is no rational motivation for the passage of its new election law other than demonstrating fealty to the false claims elevated by Trump,” The Washington Post’s Philip Bump wrote. Perry Bacon Jr. of FiveThirtyEight put it this way: “The enactment of this law in that state is a particularly alarming sign that the Republican Party’s attacks on democratic norms and values are continuing and in some ways accelerating.” Sadly, this approach goes hand-in-hand with today’s Republican Party. The selection of an incompetent like Donald Trump as a party leader coupled with the efforts of groups like the Koch Brothers focused solely on reducing income tax reduction has failed to offer a single solution to the major problems facing the country. Political obstruction will not attract voters and an actual platform designed to make the Democratic President a failure offers nothing that would earn the support of a voter. The only alternative left for Republicans is efforts to keep people from voting. If the courts uphold these restrictive measures it will be a sad day for democracy.

The Purpose of Tax

2021-04-10T07:39:00.005-06:00

As one of America’s most hated procedures it is time to question the real purpose of personal and corporate income taxes. Congress, with bipartisan support, has passed a variety of corporate tax breaks over the years meant to foster innovation, trigger domestic investment and boost hiring. Recent Republican legislation also cut personal income tax rates based upon claims going back to the Reagan administration that reducing tax rates for individuals will result in increased tax revenue for the government. In both cases, the justification for tax reduction is based totally upon myth. In both cases, corporate and personal tax reductions none of the promised results of the tax cuts have become true. Corporations did not use the tax cuts to increase jobs or employee wages and individual tax cuts failed to “trickle down” to improve the economic lives of those on the lower ladders of the economy. Tax cuts accomplished a single objective which was reducing the tax obligation of those who could most afford to pay taxes. A major side effect of tax reductions has been a massive increase in debt and deficits and pushing the costs of today’s government onto tomorrow’s citizens. Republicans have made tax reduction the cornerstone of political platforms to the extent they are totally lacking policies that might actually solve the country’s problems. The wealthiest Americans have managed to convince a majority of voters they would benefit from tax cuts in spite of the reality that over 80% of the savings from tax cuts only went to less than 10% of taxpayers. The same is true for corporate taxes. Over 55 of the wealthiest corporations paid no income taxes on record profits in 2019 but have successfully convinced the small “mom and pop” incorporated businesses of the benefits of tax cuts. It is time to eliminate the bullshit surrounding tax cuts and craft legislation with but one purpose...raise the necessary money to adequately fund the government. In the history of America, tax cuts have never resulted in increased hiring or have actually boosted investment. It is past time to recognize these justifications are unproven myths and the actual results proven that to be the case.

Say It Ain’t So Joe

2021-04-09T08:12:00.000-06:00

U.S. Democratic Senator Joe Manchin, Democrat from West Virginia, a pivotal vote in the evenly divided Senate, said on Wednesday he was opposed to a process called reconciliation that makes it easier to pass bills without Republican support, a potential blow to President Joe Biden's chances of passing a huge infrastructure measure. Manchin also said he would not support any step to weaken the ability of Republicans to mount filibusters to block legislation. Some Democrats want to toss aside the filibuster rule, which requires 60 votes in the 100-member chamber to approve most bills. "I simply do not believe budget reconciliation should replace regular order in the Senate," Manchin said in an opinion piece in the Washington Post. "Senate Democrats must avoid the temptation to abandon our Republican colleagues on important national issues." One has to ask Joe what is wrong with the Constitution. Our Founding Fathers felt a majority vote in the Senate was sufficient. Since when has a majority risen to 60 votes in the Senate? Democrats relied on the budget reconciliation process to avoid a possible Republican filibuster and pass Biden's $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief bill in March with a simple majority in the Senate. They have been considering doing the same with Biden's proposed infrastructure package. "The filibuster is a critical tool to protecting that input and our democratic form of government. That is why I have said it before and will say it again to remove any shred of doubt: There is no circumstance in which I will vote to eliminate or weaken the filibuster,” Manchin said. Manchin fails to acknowledge the filibuster is possibly the most abused tactic posed by Senate Republicans in their attempt to have a Democratic administration fail. "Every time the Senate voted to weaken the filibuster in the past decade, the political dysfunction and gridlock have grown more severe," Manchin wrote, saying it was time to end "political games" and return to a "new era of bipartisanship." The idea of bipartisanship with today’s Republican Senate is less likely than the coming of the tooth fairy. The centrist Democrat from West Virginia said last month he could see making filibusters more "painful" to carry out, although he was not in favor of eliminating them. The centrist Democrat from West Virginia said last month he could see making filibusters more "painful" to carry out, although he was not in favor of eliminating them. Biden said two weeks ago that the filibuster was being misused "in a gigantic way" and should be more difficult to carry out. He said he favored a return to the "talking filibuster", a tradition from decades ago that required senators to occupy the floor and make their case against legislation if they opposed it. Manchin has been willing on some issues to cross party lines, so his support is crucial to any bill passing in the 50-50 Senate. Democrats control the chamber because Vice President Kamala Harris can break a tie. The Senate parliamentarian ruled on Monday that Democrats could use reconciliation to pass more legislation this year, and Democrats were considering using the process to pass Biden's infrastructure investment package and immigration reform legislation. Republicans have never demonstrated any intention of bipartisanship going back to the Obama Presidency and in spite of talk about bipartisanship on the part of Republicans have shown no intent even when Republican votes are not deeded for Democrats to pass problem solving legislation.

Today’s Republicans

2021-04-08T08:05:00.000-06:00

Today’s G.O.P. is the party Ronald Reagan built, a party that always sees government as the problem, not the solution; people who’ve spent decades steeped in that mind-set just can’t wrap their minds around the idea of using government spending, not tax cuts, to solve a problem. This presents a serious political problem since Republicans will never have solutions to problems that the country faces. For smart Republicans like McConnell is no dummy. They witnessed how all of the objections to solutions like the Affordable Care Act helped swing voters away from Regan/government is the problem thinking to looking to government for solutions to other problems. More and more people are willing to support government when government acts effectively. The divide between political polls becomes blurred when people can choose between good, effective, problem solving government and government by party lines. Once voters see the government do something well, they worry, the public will be more inclined to have it do other things they don’t want it to do, like reducing poverty and curbing the accumulation of wealth at the top. To be fair, the Biden team has the same belief: it wants to use the popularity of its pandemic response to advance a broad center-left agenda. If Biden manages to convince the holdouts like Manchin to go along with his agenda odds are Republican obstruction will end up empowering the very things the G.O.P. wants to avoid, just as it did on stimulus. Republicans might appear to have a plan to protect republicanism but because Republicans are too fixed in their orthodoxy to take advantage of opportunities to be a part of solutions they will continue to face declining membership and declining power.

Just Another Trump Scam!

2021-04-07T08:01:00.004-06:00

Donald Trump has admitted he decided to run for President because it appeared to be a way he could make money. Once in office he screwed taxpayers by having the government and Republican political groups fill the cash registers at his private clubs. But, payments for food and lodging for Secret Service and Administration personnel was not enough for The Donald. When Donald Trump’s campaign budget was largely tapped this fall, his staff resorted to deceptive online fundraising practices that tricked donors into signing up to make extra or recurring credit card payments. According to a New York Times report, the strategies, which involved automatically checking boxes above language consenting to the donations buried below lines and lines of near gibberish, sparked a huge number of complaints, which helped push the campaign to refund an eye popping $64.3 million dollars. According to insiders interviewed by the Times in credit card fraud departments, complaints about unwanted and unexpected charges from Trump donors accounted for as much as 3% of all traffic for periods during the campaign—a stunning number when compared to the massive amount of non-political credit card transactions the companies process. “It felt,” one victim tells the Times, “like it was a scam.” Anyone else who ripped off the public to the extent of Trump would be either in jail or waiting trial.

Survey

2021-04-06T08:22:00.000-06:00

Republicans care more about people’s problems than Democrats. True or False?
Republican Majority Congresses has offered more legislative solutions for people’s problems than Democrat Majority Congresses. True or False?
Republicans are more concerned with voting rights than Democrats. True or False?
Republicans make it easier for people living in urban, metropolitan cities than Democrats. True or False?
Democrats want to restrict the right of people living in rural parts of the country to vote. True or False?
Republicans are more concerned about healthcare than Democrats. True or False?
Republicans have enacted over 70 legislative improvements to the Affordable Care Act. True of False?
Republicans enacted expansion of Medicaid in order to reach a greater number of uninsured individuals. True or False?
Republicans have proven to be more fiscal responsible than Democrats. True or False?
Republican Presidents and Republican majority Congress have always balanced the budget. True or False?
No Democratic President has ever presided over a balanced budget. True or False?
Democrats want to replace defense spending with spending on infrastructure because most road and bridge contractors are democrats. True or False?
When Republicans had a majority in the House of Representatives both Speakers Ryan and Boehner passed immigration reform legislation but Schumer prevented the legislation from coming to the floor of the Senate. True of False?
Democrats favor more immigration because immigrants favor deficit spending and increased debt. True or False?

Send results of this survey to bb37221@gmail.com by copying the survey into an email message and eliminating the incorrect answer. Along with the survey results please also include your political affiliation.

Paygo???

2021-04-05T08:21:00.003-06:00

Republicans are focused on the tax increases that will pay for the recent Biden initiatives when the real focus should be on the actual amount of legislative taxes that presently go uncollected. For example, in 2020, 55 profitable U.S. corporations paid no corporate income taxes. These corporations reported over $76 trillion dollars of profit and had they paid the 21% corporate income tax on these profits the treasury would have received $1,610,700,000.00 in additional tax revenue, almost the amount of Biden’s rescue legislation and over 10 years, far more than enough to also pay the costs of Biden’s infrastructure proposals without borrowing a single dime. An additional $500,000,000,000.00 of legislated personal income taxes a year also goes uncollected because of evasion. Then there’s the amount of lost taxes due to the use of legal deductions and special tax treatments like capital gains, carried interest, and other “tax favors” that result in lower tax rates than the legislated personal income tax rates. Paying for all of the costs of government is only a problem when so much income avoids being taxed. The solution to paying for government is not raising tax rates but collecting all of the tax presently legislated. In fact, even Republicans should recognize if every penny of personal income and corporate profits were subject to the legislated tax rates there would be no problem with a balanced budget. All of the borrowing, deficit spending, and federal debt is totally the result of granting special favors, exclusions, and exemptions which permit a significant amount of personal income and corporate profits escape being taxed or taxed at preferred rates. All of these special tax treatments need to come to an end once and for all.

Stupid Is

2021-04-04T08:23:00.000-06:00

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, a Republican elected official, appears to show that she doesn’t really know what infrastructure is. Noem, who is apparently dumb enough to be touted by ex-President Donald Trump as a possible 2024 presidential candidate, for her take on President Joe Biden’s $2 trillion infrastructure bill. The bill seeks to overhaul the country’s roads and bridges, counter the climate crisis and revitalize the eldercare and housing sectors. But in her reply, Noem demonstrated a level of ignorance that is becoming more and more characteristic of Republican politicians. “I was shocked by how much doesn’t go into infrastructure,” she said. “It goes into research and development, it goes into housing and pipes and different initiatives, green energy, and it’s not really an honest conversation that we’re having about what this proposal is.” One has to wonder what infrastructure really is in a Republican world.

Trump’s New Business

2021-04-03T08:52:00.002-06:00

Donald Trump has always fueled his businesses by telling lies and providing potential investors with false information. With his loss in the 2020 Election there is no reason to assume he will stop using lies as a way to raise money for his personal use. "There are a lot of people out there making lots of money on lies, and it's being exploited not just by Donald Trump. If you look at the big lie, election fraud, the ex-president's team raised something like $250 million between the election and the inauguration to just support something that is just factually not true. 'You can't say we're in a post-fact place', the defense made by former Trump attorney Sidney Powell in a court filing last week that "no reasonable person" could believe her false statements about the supposed role of Dominion Voting Systems in election fraud. Dominion is suing Powell, ex-Trump lawyer and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, and Fox News for defamation over assertions that the voting machine company rigged the election for President Joe Biden. You can't say we're in a post-fact place. It is in the financial interests of a lot of people to promote that. You can't do it. You have to continue to tell the truth." Just last week, Trump defended the rioters who attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6, saying they comprised "zero threat" and that law enforcement was "persecuting" them. The remarks align with false claims about voter fraud repeated by Trump over the months since he lost the November election, including a public address late last month at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Orlando where he said the vote was "rigged." Trump and the Republican Party raised about $255 million over an eight-plus week period following the Nov. 3 election, a New York Times report found. Moreover, the individuals charged in the Capitol riot upped their political donations by 75% over the five-week period following the election, compared with the five-week period preceding it, NBC News reported. One has to be amazed just how gullible the American public has become and equally amazing is the willingness of so many supposedly intelligent people are willing to support obvious lies and misinformation with donations of their hard-earned cash to individuals neither in need of nor deserving of their contributions.

Say It Ain’t So, Joe

2021-04-02T07:40:00.003-06:00

Mr. Manchin worries that the short-term benefit of ditching the filibuster would backfire for Democrats over the long term. “I’m concerned about the House pushing an agenda that would be hard for us to maintain the majority,” Mr. Manchin said about the progressive legislation that House Democrats are stacking up at the Senate door. To a growing number of his Democratic colleagues — and not just liberals — it’s naïve to keep putting hope over history, and believe, as Mr. Manchin said about gun legislation, that Republicans may say, “Listen, it’s time for us to do the reasonable, sensible thing.” Of course, few in a Senate that depends on Mr. Manchin for a 50th vote will say outright that their colleague is indulging in fantasy. “Joe’s focus, I believe, is bipartisanship, and I agree with the starting point,” said Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, before lowering the boom: “They weren’t going to give us a single vote,” he said about the stimulus bill. What Joe has consistently ignored is Republicans have no intention of any form of cooperation with a Democratic administration or a Democratic agenda. What more proof does Joe need than the Affordable Care Act? This legislation was, for the most part, designed by the Heritage Foundation, a Republican/Right-wing think tank. It was first voted into law in Massachusetts and signed into law by a Republican governor. President met with Senator Grassley, a Republican, on a number of occasions asking for and getting his input for the legislation. In spite of having some of Grassley’s suggestion included in the legislation when it came time for a vote not a single Republican voted for the measure. The recent Corona Relief Act is another example where a Republican amendment was included in the measure and the Republican author of the amendment still voted against the measure. The idea of Republican bipartisanship is a myth with no possible reality just like the tooth fairy. Republicans just cannot govern. The only thing to come from a Republican majority in over 10 years is tax cuts and obstruction of every thing else. So, Joe must have some special cool aid stowed in the galley of Almost Heaven that he continues to drink on a daily basis if he thinks there is a chance in Hell McConnell will ever vote in a bipartisanship manner.

Senator Manchin

2021-04-01T08:21:00.004-06:00

Thoughts about the need for retaining some form of the filibuster are appreciated. True democracy requires that all political extremes have a voice in crafting legislation. As a rule, one-sided political rule is not very beneficial to Americans. And, for the past two decades, going back to the “Hassert Rule” America has paid a very hefty price for one-sided political governance. But, today when only one side has intentions of providing solutions to problems and one side only has intentions of blocking any attempt to solve problems facing the country the choice has to favor the side offering solutions. For the past 10 years America has had to live with the situation where the only solutions to problems of voting rights, immigration, citizenship for the Dreamers who know no country other than the United States, raising the minimum wage, increasing in taxes for corporations and the addition of more brackets with higher marginal rates at the top end of the tax brackets, better, less expensive healthcare, expanding coverage for Medicaid, the crumbling infrastructure, or the years-long measures to close loopholes in gun legislation. Yes, in the past, Republicans have claimed to be concerned about these problems and even talked about solutions, but the reality is not a single measure has been offered in a Republican majority House or Senate that might offer a solution to any of these problems. Bipartisanship is very much desired but only when the goal of bipartisanship is the actual solutions to Americas problems. Allowing Republicans to continue the part of obstruction should not be a political strategy of you or any other follow Democrats choose to follow. You, of all people, should be very aware that promises of solutions are no longer a winning election strategy. Today, more than ever, the winning strategy is enacting solutions to the problems facing your constituents. Republicans have chosen the path of obstructing viable solutions and have failed completely to offer an alternative to solutions that are part of the Biden offerings. In fact, the only legislative solution recently enacted by Republicans seems to be finding ways to make it harder for people to vote. What could be more un-democratic that the Republican attempts to restrict voting and make it harder for citizens to go to the polls, all in the name of non-existent voting fraud.

The Businessman

2021-03-31T09:26:00.001-06:00

Donald Trump has focused on creating an image of a successful businessman. This image is worth looking at. A successful businessman creates businesses like Facebook, Apple, Microsoft, or Amazon. These businesses have brought their creators and initial investors untold millions of dollars and on a daily basis, rewards thousands, if not millions of employees with decent jobs and the attending benefits that go with decent jobs. So it is not unusual to take a look at the businesses created by Donald Trump. For example, Trump Steaks, Trump Water, Trump University, Trump magazine, Trump Casinos, Trump Mortgages, Trump Airlines, Trump Vodka, or even the Trump pandemic response or, of course, the 2020 Trump presidential campaign. Just how successful has Trump, the business creator been? How many of the Trump businesses have come anywhere near the successes of, say Amazon? How many Trump business founders are running around boasting of their entrepreneurial successes while, at the same time, enjoying the life that comes from an outstanding success? It seems like Trump is setting up another con job if he plans to start another business. Sadly, there are probably enough gullible Americans that plan to contribute hard earned money to fund another failed Trump venture. Of course, like everything else he has promoted, not a penny of Trump money will go into any of his ventures. The closest he will come to investing his own money is to borrow from a gullible bank or other lending institution so hurting for business that the lending institution will overlook Trumps failures or the lack of success of his existing business yet to fail. Trump will attempt to sell shares in his new, social media venture and yo can be certain he will personally pocket a good share of the initial investment. Oh well, like PT BArnum said, there are fools born...etc.

For the People

2021-03-30T07:25:00.000-06:00

The reintroduction of a sweeping election reform bill has earned the criticism of Republican lawmakers, but a new survey found that a majority of their party's voters support the legislation. In fact, the Data for Progress poll found H.R. 1—also known as the For the People Act—has broad public support. More than two-thirds of likely voters (68 percent) said they would back the proposal. Just 16 percent said they opposed it. The support also transcended party lines, with 70 percent of Democrats, 68 percent of independent or third-party voters and 57 percent of Republican voters expressing approval for the bill. H.R. 1 would work to expand voter access, improve election integrity and security, revise rules for political spending and set out provisions related to ethics for all three branches of the federal government, according to a summary of the legislation. Every single House Democrat signed on to the For the People Act on Monday, arguing it will help to "clean up corruption in Washington, empower the American people and restore faith and integrity to our government." "The 2020 election underscored the need for comprehensive, structural democracy reform. Americans across the country were forced to overcome rampant voter suppression, gerrymandering and a torrent of special-interest dark money just to exercise their vote and their voice in our democracy," Representative John Sarbanes (D-Md.) said in a statement. Sarbanes, the chair of the House's Democracy Reform Task Force, reintroduced the bill in the 117th Congress. "It shouldn't have to be this way," he said. Republicans, on the other hand, have continued to mount opposition to the reform bill. Earlier this week, former Homeland Security Deputy Secretary Ken Cuccinelli announced he was launching the the Election Transparency Initiative to "act quickly to defeat the efforts of Democrats in Washington to federalize election laws through H.R.1, while simultaneously going on offense at the state level to rally the grass roots around meaningful reforms." Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell criticized Democrats for attempting to "recycle failed legislation" with their renewed push to pass the For the People Act, calling it a "federal takeover." A new poll found that more than two-thirds of likely voters (68 percent) said they would back a sweeping election reform bill. McConnell said the bill would allow Democrats to "grab unprecedented power over how America conducts its elections and how American citizens can engage in political speech." Representative Byron Daniels (R-Fla.) made a similar argument in an editorial for Fox News. He wrote that H.R. 1 was the Democratic Party's "latest attempt to disregard the Constitution in their ruthless power grab in the form of 'election reform.'" But the Data for Progress poll also found that a majority of respondents support major provisions of the bill. The measures that received the most support from likely voters were the prevention of foreign interference, limiting money in politics and increasing election security. More than half of the respondents—58 percent—said they supported voting by mail, a method that was heavily used by nearly every state during the 2020 election because of the coronavirus pandemic.

Republicans Keep Coming Up With More Batshit Reasons to Oppose D.C. Statehood

2021-03-29T09:26:00.000-06:00

More Batshit Reasons to Oppose D.C. Statehood on the part of Republicans. Their talk of car dealerships, airports, and yard signs obscures the glaring reason the right opposes D.C. statehood. There is one very obvious reason why Republicans are hell-bent on refusing statehood to Washington, D.C.: The city is a Democratic stronghold, and its becoming a state would surely result in two more Democratic votes in the Senate. For this reason Republicans remain intent on denying the city’s residents the same federal representation that even states with smaller populations than D.C. enjoy, including Wyoming and Vermont. But rather than simply admit they don’t believe the capital city’s largely Democratic, plurality-Black population deserves representation due to its political leanings, some conservatives are trotting out nonsensical arguments to justify their anti-statehood stance. On Monday the House Oversight and Reform Committee held a hearing on H.R. 51, a Democratic-led bill aimed at granting statehood to the District. GOP Rep. Jody Hice used his speaking time at the hearing to argue that the District’s supposed lack of car dealerships is a driving force behind his reasoning for voting against H.R. 51. “D.C. would be the only state—the only state—without an airport, without a car dealership, without a capital city, and without a landfill,” said Hice, who has previously asserted that granting statehood to the U.S. capital would run counter to the vision of the Constitution’s Framers. As noted by Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, Hice’s rationale for opposing statehood is not only ridiculous, it is also false. “It was cited that there’s no car dealership in the District of Columbia,” Raskin said. “That’s not a constitutional restriction. It turns out there is a car dealership in the District of Columbia. At this point [do] we agree that people in D.C. should enjoy equal political rights? Of course not, because they’re simply trying to gin up whatever arguments they can think of. These are frivolous arguments.” After Hice was informed of his erroneous argument by Democratic reps Raskin and Gerald Connolly, who laughed off the “absurdity” of his colleague’s claims, the Georgia Republican explained his ignorance by saying, “If there’s a car dealership in D.C., I apologize for being wrong. I have no idea where it is.” (There is, of course, more than one auto dealership in D.C., including a downtown Tesla storefront near the Capitol building and the White House.) Still, Hice appeared to be undeterred by his error. He went on to push his arguments about D.C.’s lack of a landfill and airport, with the latter point conveniently ignoring the three major airports that operate just outside the city; one, Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport in Arlington, Virginia, is connected to the Washington Metro system, while another, Dulles International Airport in Dulles, Virginia, is slated to have its own subway stop in 2022. Another Republican on Monday hearkened back to the nation’s founding to make the case against D.C. statehood. “The Founding Fathers never intended for Washington D.C. to be a state,” tweeted South Dakota senator Mike Rounds, to which historian Kevin Kruse shot back: “The Dakota territory was cut in half and admitted as two states, as part of a larger scheme by Republicans to add six new states over a nine month period in 1889-1890 and thereby pack the Senate with Republicans ... like you.” Alessandra Biaggi, a New York state senator, also responded to Rounds: “The Founding Fathers never intended for me to vote.” One of the most inane arguments came from Zack Smith, a legal fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, who claimed during the hearing that D.C. residents already have “undue influence over the federal government” because of their ability to plant political yard signs that lawmakers might see when they’re driving or walking around town. “There’s no question that D.C. residents already impact the national debate,” Smith droned. “For the members here today, how many of you saw D.C. statehood yard signs or bumper stickers or banners on your way to this hearing today? I certainly did. Where else in the nation could such simple actions reach so many members of Congress?” Some Republicans have been upfront about their opposition to statehood by directly pointing to the left-leaning voters who occupy the city. “Our base is concerned. This is their first step of their political power grab,” GOP Rep. James Comer said in a recent interview with The Washington Post. Comer returned to this line during the Monday hearing, pointing to D.C.’s “90% Democratic” population and adding, “D.C. statehood is a key part of the radical leftist agenda to reshape America, along with the Green New Deal, defunding the police, and packing the U.S. Supreme Court.” While H.R. 51 will almost certainly pass in the Democrat-controlled House, it will face major opposition in the Senate, where Democrats also maintain control—given Vice President Kamala Harris’s tie-breaking power—but will likely face near-total opposition from Republicans set on blocking it from reaching the 60-vote threshold to overcome the filibuster.

Republican Cult?

2021-03-28T08:25:00.005-06:00

Has the Republican Party been turned in to a cult? Is the Republican Party no longer a political party but just another cult like the KKK, White Supremacists, Proud Boys, or Oath Keepers? Did Donald Trump evolve into the cult leader? Virtually every known cult is headed by a single controlling leader. The cult leader is usually a man who has a consuming ego. He attacks his enemies and lashes out in anger. He also has an absolute belief that he is always correct. And, he listens to neither advice nor criticism. Finally the cult leader is paranoid and craves worship and adulation. One of the other signs of a cult is that followers are usually people sick of their jobs. By promising a better future the cult leader manages to convince his followers that his way is the only way and those so convinced are usually separated from their personal funds by appeals from the cult leader. So, what do you think? Political Party or a cult?

Republicans and Voting

2021-03-27T08:31:00.005-06:00

Rather than craft policy that appeals to a majority of Americans Republicans have chosen to attempt to restrict the numbers of Americans who can actually vote. This strategy has no Constitutional support but is favored by people like Senator Mitch McConnell. Republicans oppose a measure they claim is an attempt by Democrats to give themselves a permanent political advantage by driving up turnout among minority groups and by preventing Republicans, who control a majority of statehouses, from drawing new congressional districts that would tilt the playing field in their favor. “This is an attempt by one party to write the rules of our political system,” said Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the minority leader. “We can’t afford to go further down this road.” At the same time, McConnell is attempting to do exactly what he accuses Democrats of doing, rewriting election rules to a Republican advantage. The Legislation in question is chock-full of liberal priorities. The For the People Act, HR1, would usher in landmark changes to make it easier to vote, to enact new campaign finance laws and to end to partisan gerrymandering of congressional districts. The legislation passed the House along party lines earlier this month. It faces solid opposition from Republicans who are working to clamp down on ballot access, and who argue that the bill is a power-grab by Democrats. “Today, in the 21st Century, there is a concerted, nationwide effort to limit the rights of citizens to vote and to truly have a voice in their own government,” said Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the majority leader. He called the voting rollbacks in the states an “existential threat to our democracy” reminiscent of the Jim Crow segregationist laws of the past, chanting “Shame! Shame! Shame!” at Republicans who are promoting them. Following the loss of Trump in the 2020 election it is obvious that Republicans have no intention of enacting policy with a wide ranging appeal and should not be rewarded in any way for their inability to appeal to a majority of eligible voters. There is nothing in the Constitution that justifies limiting the numbers of voters should be a way to win elections. Democrats need to eliminate the filibuster, put HR1 and HR4 on the floor of the Senate for an up or down vote. In addition, Democrats need to also place sensible gun regulations including expanded background checks, a ban on so-called assault weapons, and a ban on high capacity magazines on the floor of the Senate for a filibuster-free up or down vote. For too long Democrats allowed Republicans to control the rules governing legislation and elections and the result was total incompetence in governing. America needs to experience GOOD GOVERNMENT. It is time for the experiment in small/incompetent government to be over once and for all.

Thoughts and Prayers

2021-03-26T08:49:00.007-06:00

The recent mass shooting in Boulder was at least the 246th mass shooting in the United States since January 2009, and that on average 805 people die by gun violence in Colorado every year. Yet after virtually every shooting like the one in Boulder on March 22, 2021, Senator and Representative appear on camera offering their “thoughts and prayers”. Based upon the 246 number it does not appear thoughts and prayers are doing much to prevent these tragedies. How many more must die before something EFFECTIVE is done to put an end to this pandemic of death? Perhaps if the Senators and Representatives replaced thoughts and prayers with votes to improve gun laws shootings like the one at Boulder can be prevented from happening in the future. One thing is certain, thoughts and prayers will not stop a single shooting in the future and what is desperately needed is putting an end to this useless loss of life.