Republican Minority Leander John Boehner says we have to cut Social Security ("entitlement") because we need to pay for the wars in Iraq in Afghanistan.
He wants us to work until we're 70 years 0ld - to pay for wars the GOP started - and never funded.
Years ago, Al Gore was laughed out of Washington when he said Social Security should be put in a "lock Box" because he knew politicians were borrowing from the fund we ALL pay into.
I will NOT work until I'm nearly dead to pay for bogus wars! Afghanistan - yes, because that's where Ben Ladin was. Iraq, $2-Trillion worth - NO, No, No.
Young adults should think this through - until Social Security, children were totally responsible for spoon-feeding & diapering their aging parents. Social Security - for which I paid into all my life - allows me SOME dignity - and allows our children the right to pursue their own lives.
John Boehner is so wrong.
The real solution is to raise the "cap" on earnings - people like me pay 100% of our share of Social Security - but people earning more than $120,000 a year only have to pay for the first $120,000 of their income.
Therefore, people earning, let's say, $240,000 a year only pay 50% into Social Security - yet they get to draw their full benefits.
This is not right - yet neither party has had the courage to tackle this unfairness - because, of course, it's the money from the rich who get them re-elected!
Shame, shame, on both political parties!!
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Taxpayer money buying Taliban guns aimed at our kids
House of Reps hearing the other day revealed that there are 190,000 U.S. contractors between Iraq and Afghanistan.
Outfits like the infamous Blackwater get millions to perform, for example, security services. They keep their $20-million and hire local Afghanistanis, for maybe
$1-million, to escort convoys of goods coming from our bases in Pakistan to bases scattered around Afghanistan.
Those local "security forces" in turn pay off the Taliban to not shoot at our soldiers as they drive through the mountain passes, bringing food, water, bedding, boots, etc. to the troops.
It's OK, though, for them to shoot at our brave men and women in different spots at different times.
The taliban turns around and buys more weapons with the money channeled from you and I, as taxes, into payment for Blackwater, into local "sub-contractors," into the hands of our enemies.
This is so sick.
Outfits like the infamous Blackwater get millions to perform, for example, security services. They keep their $20-million and hire local Afghanistanis, for maybe
$1-million, to escort convoys of goods coming from our bases in Pakistan to bases scattered around Afghanistan.
Those local "security forces" in turn pay off the Taliban to not shoot at our soldiers as they drive through the mountain passes, bringing food, water, bedding, boots, etc. to the troops.
It's OK, though, for them to shoot at our brave men and women in different spots at different times.
The taliban turns around and buys more weapons with the money channeled from you and I, as taxes, into payment for Blackwater, into local "sub-contractors," into the hands of our enemies.
This is so sick.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
The Fool(s) on the Hill
The Fool on the Hill was a Beatles tune, recorded in 1967.
Today, some 43 years later, we need to pluralize that old Fool to include the absurd Fools in the Senate who are conducting the "confirmation" hearings of Elena Kagan for Supreme Court Justice.
Each political party has taken its own idealogical stance, and no one is budging. Each Senator gets to drone on for at least five minutes, with a prepared speech that often has no relevance to the issue at hand. Then they get another 10 or 15 minutes to question her.
All Senators are perfectly free to ask the EXACT same question as was asked by the last Senator - over and over and over. The woman in question has to smile politely, and answer again - in often the same words as she did 10 minutes prior.
Here's the bottom line on Elena Kagan. Yes - she has no courtroom experience - nor did 38 of our prior 111 Supreme Court Justices. Yes - she is a liberal.
As Lindsay Graham (a Republican) said at the confirmation of Chief Justice Roberts (a Republican), during the Bush administration, "elections have consequences - presidents get to pick their Supreme Court Judges - period."
Today, some 43 years later, we need to pluralize that old Fool to include the absurd Fools in the Senate who are conducting the "confirmation" hearings of Elena Kagan for Supreme Court Justice.
Each political party has taken its own idealogical stance, and no one is budging. Each Senator gets to drone on for at least five minutes, with a prepared speech that often has no relevance to the issue at hand. Then they get another 10 or 15 minutes to question her.
All Senators are perfectly free to ask the EXACT same question as was asked by the last Senator - over and over and over. The woman in question has to smile politely, and answer again - in often the same words as she did 10 minutes prior.
Here's the bottom line on Elena Kagan. Yes - she has no courtroom experience - nor did 38 of our prior 111 Supreme Court Justices. Yes - she is a liberal.
As Lindsay Graham (a Republican) said at the confirmation of Chief Justice Roberts (a Republican), during the Bush administration, "elections have consequences - presidents get to pick their Supreme Court Judges - period."
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Reading the "McChrystals"
So, the former "Dark Ops" General resigned today - I'm thinking it wouldn't take a tea-reader to have figured this one out long in advance.
Prior to heading the operation in Afghanistan, his modus operandi was working "in the dark" - doing dark things, under the radar, threading the needle between legal and what was considered "necessary." His bravado team relished in flaunting the rules and distaining accepted behaviour.
These cats were cool, brave, and outrageous in their design of how to find, interrogate, and kill our oppositiion. That was their mission - and our tacit approval (often framed by feigned ignorance of what they were up to) led them forward, onto greater and greater exploits.
Fortunately, or unfortunately, depending on point of view, once these rebels were required to become legitimate, brought out into the sunlight of the battlefield and put in positions of leadership, their "dark ops" bloodlines could not be contained.
It was a lockerroom mentality of testesterone gone wild - and believe me, I don't condone the ghastly things they did to keep us "safe."
But it is time, if we are the nation of values that we purport to be, that this
dark-side gang be retired.
For a complete picture of what "dark ops" is all about, Read Jane Mayer's true book "The Dark Side," - if you dare - it will change you.
Prior to heading the operation in Afghanistan, his modus operandi was working "in the dark" - doing dark things, under the radar, threading the needle between legal and what was considered "necessary." His bravado team relished in flaunting the rules and distaining accepted behaviour.
These cats were cool, brave, and outrageous in their design of how to find, interrogate, and kill our oppositiion. That was their mission - and our tacit approval (often framed by feigned ignorance of what they were up to) led them forward, onto greater and greater exploits.
Fortunately, or unfortunately, depending on point of view, once these rebels were required to become legitimate, brought out into the sunlight of the battlefield and put in positions of leadership, their "dark ops" bloodlines could not be contained.
It was a lockerroom mentality of testesterone gone wild - and believe me, I don't condone the ghastly things they did to keep us "safe."
But it is time, if we are the nation of values that we purport to be, that this
dark-side gang be retired.
For a complete picture of what "dark ops" is all about, Read Jane Mayer's true book "The Dark Side," - if you dare - it will change you.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Guilty Until Proven Innocent?
I was horrified to read today that a Republican Senator wants to require drug testing of all people receiving unemployment benefits. Having worked every year of my life since age 16 (when I couldn't WAIT to work), it dawned on me that not even a 46 year track record of believing in self-sustaining work could be challenged.
I mean, hey - maybe suddenly, after 46 years, I woke up on a Tuesday morning and felt - WTH (what the heck) - lazy. Maybe, suddenly, I found crack cocaine in my grocery bag, actually knew what it was, and snorted until my eyes popped. Having discovered Nirvana at this advanced age, of course I would never want to work again. If I could get Government benefits, to keep me in a poverty lifestyle to which I'd never before become accustomed, I mean, that's about as
way-cool as my life could turn out!
A conversation with a co-worker, two generations younger than me, opened my eyes to the new "guilty until proven innocent" reality of life here in the U.S.A.
This young woman, a favorite of mine, has grown up in the drug-testing era. A professional athlete by trade, she has had to be drug tested for all the important jobs in her life.
She sees nothing wrong with this, and feels that if a person is receiving public benefits, like unemployment insurance - for which she feels she is paying - then any and every one should accept a drug test without a problem.
My problem is that I, also, have been paying for unemployment insurance - for a far longer time, and have therefore made a substantially greater contribution, than has she.
Yet, I'm not equivocating about the 21-year-old laid-off from Staples, who worked for six months after college, and now needs help because this economy stinks. I'm not upset about the 32-year-olds, who've paid into the system for maybe 17 years, who lost their jobs as teachers and now need help.
I'm figuring we're all in this boat together. And I don't like the idea of living in a country where we're all suspected of being guilty, unless we're willing to, as she says, "pee in a cup" and prove otherwise.
Our nation suceeds because we are (or used to be) a system of laws based on the premise that we citizens are INNOCENT until proven guilty.
If we manage to flip-flop that equation, if the government can always assume that we are guilty unless we can prove otherwise, then we have entered an era of tyranny in which, yes indeedy, I'll need a lot of crack cocaine to survive.
Just somebody, show me what it looks like.
I mean, hey - maybe suddenly, after 46 years, I woke up on a Tuesday morning and felt - WTH (what the heck) - lazy. Maybe, suddenly, I found crack cocaine in my grocery bag, actually knew what it was, and snorted until my eyes popped. Having discovered Nirvana at this advanced age, of course I would never want to work again. If I could get Government benefits, to keep me in a poverty lifestyle to which I'd never before become accustomed, I mean, that's about as
way-cool as my life could turn out!
A conversation with a co-worker, two generations younger than me, opened my eyes to the new "guilty until proven innocent" reality of life here in the U.S.A.
This young woman, a favorite of mine, has grown up in the drug-testing era. A professional athlete by trade, she has had to be drug tested for all the important jobs in her life.
She sees nothing wrong with this, and feels that if a person is receiving public benefits, like unemployment insurance - for which she feels she is paying - then any and every one should accept a drug test without a problem.
My problem is that I, also, have been paying for unemployment insurance - for a far longer time, and have therefore made a substantially greater contribution, than has she.
Yet, I'm not equivocating about the 21-year-old laid-off from Staples, who worked for six months after college, and now needs help because this economy stinks. I'm not upset about the 32-year-olds, who've paid into the system for maybe 17 years, who lost their jobs as teachers and now need help.
I'm figuring we're all in this boat together. And I don't like the idea of living in a country where we're all suspected of being guilty, unless we're willing to, as she says, "pee in a cup" and prove otherwise.
Our nation suceeds because we are (or used to be) a system of laws based on the premise that we citizens are INNOCENT until proven guilty.
If we manage to flip-flop that equation, if the government can always assume that we are guilty unless we can prove otherwise, then we have entered an era of tyranny in which, yes indeedy, I'll need a lot of crack cocaine to survive.
Just somebody, show me what it looks like.
Monday, June 21, 2010
Two LIttle Secrets about the Tea Party
Pundits, polls and prognasticators have been telling us for a year that the Tea Party is going to have sweeping effect in the November elections.
Since they lean Republican, the consensus is that Democrats will lose the House and control of the Senate.
Let me tell you two simple secrets I know about "news," having been in the industry for almost 20 years.
First, "news" has to be NEW - and the Tea Party has certainly been that.
Second, to really go anywhere, "news" has to have a good visual with it - and again, the tea baggers have provided plenty of great pictures.
But here's a true story: I once covered some young girl scouts making bird houses to place along a walking trail. It was a pretty lame story, but I got a teriffic picture of one youngster, biting her tongue as she concentrated for all she was worth on putting the last touches on her bird house - which was colorfully painted and really cute.
Cute kid - colorful birdhouse - great photo - lame story.
That same weekend, there was a huge group of homeowners meeting to see what they could do to fight off a large, projected property tax increase.
Lots of adults, sitting in a meeting - boring picture but very important story in the region.
Guess which story ended up on B-1, above the fold? The cute kid, of course, with the great visual.
The point is, by the time of the November elections, tea baggers rioting will no longer be "new" and the images will be predictable.
The "new" story will be how Democrats came out in droves to stave off a Republican challenge and how the Tea Party really fizzled in effecting election outcomes.
I betcha'!
Since they lean Republican, the consensus is that Democrats will lose the House and control of the Senate.
Let me tell you two simple secrets I know about "news," having been in the industry for almost 20 years.
First, "news" has to be NEW - and the Tea Party has certainly been that.
Second, to really go anywhere, "news" has to have a good visual with it - and again, the tea baggers have provided plenty of great pictures.
But here's a true story: I once covered some young girl scouts making bird houses to place along a walking trail. It was a pretty lame story, but I got a teriffic picture of one youngster, biting her tongue as she concentrated for all she was worth on putting the last touches on her bird house - which was colorfully painted and really cute.
Cute kid - colorful birdhouse - great photo - lame story.
That same weekend, there was a huge group of homeowners meeting to see what they could do to fight off a large, projected property tax increase.
Lots of adults, sitting in a meeting - boring picture but very important story in the region.
Guess which story ended up on B-1, above the fold? The cute kid, of course, with the great visual.
The point is, by the time of the November elections, tea baggers rioting will no longer be "new" and the images will be predictable.
The "new" story will be how Democrats came out in droves to stave off a Republican challenge and how the Tea Party really fizzled in effecting election outcomes.
I betcha'!
Capitalists Recognize Climate Change
While politicians dither about whether there is - or isn't - climate change on the horizon, guess who's already acknowledged its future rammifications and is making changes to accomodate its eventuality?
Holy smokes - it's Business!
For example, the skiing industry, both in Europe and the United States, has seen changes that go back almost 10 years. The Aspen Skiing Co. has tracked milder Novembers and worries about warm periods in March, their big month of "Spring Break" skiing that finally puts them in the black for the year.
Insurance companies, too, those risk-conscious critters, are aware that weather "events" are becoming more frequent, violent and unpredictable. What a spot to be in when your very business is predicting risk for profit!
To read the whole fascinating article, go to http:www.motherjones.com
Holy smokes - it's Business!
For example, the skiing industry, both in Europe and the United States, has seen changes that go back almost 10 years. The Aspen Skiing Co. has tracked milder Novembers and worries about warm periods in March, their big month of "Spring Break" skiing that finally puts them in the black for the year.
Insurance companies, too, those risk-conscious critters, are aware that weather "events" are becoming more frequent, violent and unpredictable. What a spot to be in when your very business is predicting risk for profit!
To read the whole fascinating article, go to http:www.motherjones.com
Sunday, June 20, 2010
11 Brands That Will Disappear In 2011: 24/7 Wall Street
Some companies are in advance of the extinction curve: read more at
www.partis
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
Saturday, June 19, 2010
Simpson's Social Security Video Rant: Why It's Important
The word "entitleme
Here in New York, about to go under for billions in deficits, there's a website that lists all the government pensions - 1400 people here get over $100,000 in retirement benefits - to name two of them, Sen. Joe Bruno, and former State Controller Alan Hevisi, both of whom are convicted criminals.
It's interesting that my husband and I, who worked all our lives, get a miserly amount in "entitleme
Read the full article at HuffingtonPost.com
Here in New York, about to go under for billions in deficits, there's a website that lists all the government pensions - 1400 people here get over $100,000 in retirement benefits - to name two of them, Sen. Joe Bruno, and former State Controller Alan Hevisi, both of whom are convicted criminals.
It's interesting that my husband and I, who worked all our lives, get a miserly amount in "entitleme
Read the full article at HuffingtonPost.com
Left, Right & Center: The Gulf Oil Spill And The Role Of Government
Forced ourselves to watch the whole stupid charade of hearings - here are some questions nobody thought to ask: www.partis
Join the discussion - no login required!
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
Join the discussion - no login required!
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
Friday, June 18, 2010
What they DIDN'T Ask BP
Hubby and I watched most of the many grueling hours of testimony as BP CEO Tony Hayward faced down our so-called fierce guardians in the House of Representatives.
It was pretty much a farce, as each legislator got their three minutes in front of the camera, to impress the folks back home. Mostly, they went over and over the same territory, and mostly, Hayward stone-walled them.
Here's the questions I would have asked-which were not asked:
1. Considering the huge volume of explosive methane gas in this well - which made it explode in the first place - is it REALLY a good idea to drill two more "relief" wells into the same explosive stew? Is BP absolutely certain that these relief wells will do the trick - is there even a 1-percent chance that THEY might also explode, leaving us with three huge leaks?
2. Has the Mineral Management Service (MMS) in charge of inspecting these wells, sent squads of people to BP's other rigs, anywhere within 1,000 miles of American shores, to see what the heck might be going on there? Are we assured that BP is working safely on these other rigs? Hayward said there were "hundreds" in the Gulf region alone!
3. If this well was capable of producing 60,000 barrels (43 gallons in each barrel) of oil a day, why were they shutting it down by filling it with mud when it blew? Hadn't they just tapped into the motherload of profits? Did they know they had an uncontrollable "tiger by the tail?" And does that happen often?
We've all worked in companies where the "CEO" is the least informed, least competent person on the payroll - why waste time with Tony Hayward (now being replaced) - why not ask questions that might actually matter a month or so from now?
It was pretty much a farce, as each legislator got their three minutes in front of the camera, to impress the folks back home. Mostly, they went over and over the same territory, and mostly, Hayward stone-walled them.
Here's the questions I would have asked-which were not asked:
1. Considering the huge volume of explosive methane gas in this well - which made it explode in the first place - is it REALLY a good idea to drill two more "relief" wells into the same explosive stew? Is BP absolutely certain that these relief wells will do the trick - is there even a 1-percent chance that THEY might also explode, leaving us with three huge leaks?
2. Has the Mineral Management Service (MMS) in charge of inspecting these wells, sent squads of people to BP's other rigs, anywhere within 1,000 miles of American shores, to see what the heck might be going on there? Are we assured that BP is working safely on these other rigs? Hayward said there were "hundreds" in the Gulf region alone!
3. If this well was capable of producing 60,000 barrels (43 gallons in each barrel) of oil a day, why were they shutting it down by filling it with mud when it blew? Hadn't they just tapped into the motherload of profits? Did they know they had an uncontrollable "tiger by the tail?" And does that happen often?
We've all worked in companies where the "CEO" is the least informed, least competent person on the payroll - why waste time with Tony Hayward (now being replaced) - why not ask questions that might actually matter a month or so from now?
Monday, June 14, 2010
BP Disaster
I am astonished that Pres. Obama and his team have been so tone deaf on this disaster - more than two weeks ago, I told my husband that the President should have done an Oval Office address to the nation.
I watched 4 - count em' FOUR hours of hearings this weekend about the spill and the way it's impacting Gulf Coast residents. The good news is that there is a lot more help down there than the media is reporting.
The bad news is that 13 different Gov't agencies are involved and it is really the Keystone Kops of oil collection.
I can't help but go back to the GOP mantra of 'deregulation' - we have seen it's impact on Wall Street, in the contracting scandals in the military, in the whole idea that business will regulate itself.
NO IT WON'T!!!!! Capitalism is based on profits - and profits will/must be derived in any way they can - including scrimping on basic structures that keep us all safe.
There has to be a balance between regulating industry and allowing them the profits they need. Being against ALL regulation in a corporation's dream - having just the right amount to keep them on the up and up is the American Dream.
Friday, June 11, 2010
Hard to be a Good Citizen
So, it's the middle of the night (Friday) and I can't sleep. C-Span is droning on in the background. I make coffee and start to listen to the debate.
It's the financial regulation legislation, the "Conference" committee wherein the Senate and the House try to blend their bills and modify them both to satisfy each other.
First to speak is a Republican, who puts the fear of God into me - this bill, all 2,000 pages of it, will kill jobs, kill industry, stop companies from "hedging" their bets on the future cost of materials, like steel for the tractors they make. In this horrid recesion, this bill will send us all back to the stone age to grind sticks together in order to make fire. We will be hungry, in ragged clothes.
Since they're so courteous that they always "rotate" speakers, next up is a Democrat. According to this gentleman, we will all be in clover and honey as soon as the bill is passed. Companies will quit their greedy ways - poor people will keep their homes. Never - NEVER - again will we see the kind of financial collapse just experienced. Wall Street will finally make everything up to the suffering people on Main Street and we will all ride off into the sunset of financial security together.
So, I'm like - confused? Is this an awful, awful bill, presented by Socialist-loving Democrats who only want to create a dependant society, or is it a good bill, objected to by the "Just Say No" Republicans whose only agenda is making Obama fail?
Well, here's the deal. I listened to these people - all 43 of them who are on the Conference Committee - and not one of them ever budged from their "party line." Democrats said the bill was the answer to all our problems. Republicans said if the bill was passed, we would witness the demise of capitalism, free markets and American pie.
I'm saying - it's tough to be a good citizen. But I'm not gonna quit trying!
It's the financial regulation legislation, the "Conference" committee wherein the Senate and the House try to blend their bills and modify them both to satisfy each other.
First to speak is a Republican, who puts the fear of God into me - this bill, all 2,000 pages of it, will kill jobs, kill industry, stop companies from "hedging" their bets on the future cost of materials, like steel for the tractors they make. In this horrid recesion, this bill will send us all back to the stone age to grind sticks together in order to make fire. We will be hungry, in ragged clothes.
Since they're so courteous that they always "rotate" speakers, next up is a Democrat. According to this gentleman, we will all be in clover and honey as soon as the bill is passed. Companies will quit their greedy ways - poor people will keep their homes. Never - NEVER - again will we see the kind of financial collapse just experienced. Wall Street will finally make everything up to the suffering people on Main Street and we will all ride off into the sunset of financial security together.
So, I'm like - confused? Is this an awful, awful bill, presented by Socialist-loving Democrats who only want to create a dependant society, or is it a good bill, objected to by the "Just Say No" Republicans whose only agenda is making Obama fail?
Well, here's the deal. I listened to these people - all 43 of them who are on the Conference Committee - and not one of them ever budged from their "party line." Democrats said the bill was the answer to all our problems. Republicans said if the bill was passed, we would witness the demise of capitalism, free markets and American pie.
I'm saying - it's tough to be a good citizen. But I'm not gonna quit trying!
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Let's Talk About Beck
Been reading an (old) magazine article about Glenn Beck and his empire of books, TV, and radio - he candidly admits that "anyone who believes him as a news source is an idiot."
I'd like to invite people to tell me why they listen to, and believe Glenn Beck, as well as those who don't - to talk to each other here.
Be respectful. please, and sincere. The idea of this blog is to TALK to each other, not scream or rant and rave.
I'd like to invite people to tell me why they listen to, and believe Glenn Beck, as well as those who don't - to talk to each other here.
Be respectful. please, and sincere. The idea of this blog is to TALK to each other, not scream or rant and rave.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Let's Talk
The news "media" has gone nuts, competing with each other for the most absurd stories, while those of us, on each side of the aisle, yearn for real conversations about the issues that face our country.
Is Obama "emotional" enough about the BP oil spill? Does Glenn Beck cry too often? Who in the heck gives a crappola!!
The idea for this blog is for thinking Americans to find a partner, across the partisan aisle, with whom to debate. No name calling, no idealogical talking points - just a real conversation, based on facts and ideas, as we know them to be.
I'd like to see each of us reach out, sharing just a bit of our hummanity, so we can come to understand that we are all Americans who desire the best for this wonderful, God given and blessed country.
I'll start.
I'm looking for a Republican woman, a grandmother, who wants to talk about the future, as she sees it, for her grandchildren. I'd like to know if she thinks "trickle down" economics has proven to work for middle class Americans. If so, why? If not, why not?
I'm interested in her views on universal health care. I'd like to know, if she's scared about so-called "Obama-Care," why she's so scared - or what she thinks we should do differently.
From there, the dialogue is open - let's, for Heaven's sake, talk!!
Is Obama "emotional" enough about the BP oil spill? Does Glenn Beck cry too often? Who in the heck gives a crappola!!
The idea for this blog is for thinking Americans to find a partner, across the partisan aisle, with whom to debate. No name calling, no idealogical talking points - just a real conversation, based on facts and ideas, as we know them to be.
I'd like to see each of us reach out, sharing just a bit of our hummanity, so we can come to understand that we are all Americans who desire the best for this wonderful, God given and blessed country.
I'll start.
I'm looking for a Republican woman, a grandmother, who wants to talk about the future, as she sees it, for her grandchildren. I'd like to know if she thinks "trickle down" economics has proven to work for middle class Americans. If so, why? If not, why not?
I'm interested in her views on universal health care. I'd like to know, if she's scared about so-called "Obama-Care," why she's so scared - or what she thinks we should do differently.
From there, the dialogue is open - let's, for Heaven's sake, talk!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)