Today we’re going to have some fun and talk about insanity. There are different degrees of insanity. Some people are just a little off but seem to function fine in society. Let’s go ahead and cite Sarah Palin as one of those.
Lately, Sarah has been locked in battle with PolitiFact, a “Snopes” type website that polices the claims of politicians in an attempt to keep them honest. It was started within the Saint Petersburg Times but has since expanded to several other newspapers. Sarah was quoted saying that “Democrats are poised now to cause the largest tax increase in US history”. Well, PolitiFact called her a “pants on fire liar” for the claim. I should mention here that PolitiFact won a 2009 Pulitzer Prize for repeatedly fact checking claims during the 2008 presidential campaign. I guess “Pea Brain Palin” has dug in on Facebook claiming that no proposal currently exists to stop tax increases from effecting individuals making less than 200 grand and couples making less than 250 grand. Well, Mr. Obama has not only made that pledge on numerous occasions but has apparently penned it into the proposed 2011 budget (which would make it a proposal that exists right?). So Sarah, when will you learn that repeated lying does nothing other than to brand you a “pants on fire liar”? Do we need to fact check those “death panels” too? Since one definition of insanity is repeating the same behavior while expecting a different result (or so I’ve been told), I think we can conclude that “Crazy Pea Brain Palin” is just that… a little crazy in that pea brain of hers. Let’s put her up there next to a Pulitzer Prize winning journalistic endeavor and ask ourselves who we’re going to put more faith into? Duh?.....
Next, let’s chat about Newt Gingrich. Have you heard that his middle ex-wife has given an extensive interview providing us with insight into the nonsensical rhetoric that populates Newt’s mind? And before I go on I’ve got to ask, what the fuck is up with the name Newt? Who names their kid Newton? I checked Wiki and Newt’s birth father was a Newton. Now we can only assume the first Newt took some shit about that name right? “Hey Fig Newton!” “Look, he's a salamander!” “Newt, toots a skin flute!” So, why saddle your kid with the same name? Unless you knew in advance he was going to grow up to be a douche bag….
Newt’s ex has described in detail Newt’s affair with his current wife during his marriage to her, wife #2 (yes, he’s on #3). I guess he wanted her to just “accept the affair”. She didn’t like that option. She quotes him as saying “You’re a Jaguar and I want a Chevrolet”. Now, I wonder what wife #3 thought of that? She’s the Chevrolet. But I digress. Newt was hammering wife #2 for a divorce shortly after she was diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis. What a guy right? But I guess you would expect nothing less since he was negotiating terms of his first divorce with a wife who was still recovering from uterine cancer surgery.
Now, none of this would really be relevant if it wasn’t for the fact that Newtie preaches family values! And here’s the good part…. Wife #2 asked him how he could speak to that while living his life in a completely different way? He answered by telling her that "It doesn't matter what I do. People need to hear what I have to say. There's no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn't matter what I live."
Let’s quickly analyze this quote. Well, screw that… we don’t have to. Let’s just look at the part that says “There’s no on e else who can say what I can say.” Really Newt? No one? No one else can say what you have to say? You're nuts Newt. Maybe your dad did in fact know in advance that you would grow into a douche bag. I think Newt is just a little crazier than Pea Brain don’t you? Sure he’s smarter (but who isn’t… well, one former President comes to mind) but he’s a little further down the crazy scale.
OK, next on my list is an acquaintance who shall remain nameless. While engaged in a recent debate, I cited an op-ed piece authored by Paul Krugman. The acquaintance in question remarked that Krugman was “a dimwit” or “whack job” or some such diminutive nickname. OK, so he doesn’t like Paul Krugman. Does Krugman have any legitimate credentials? Well, let’s see…
He has a BA from Yale and a PhD from MIT (is there a smarter segment of society than those who have attended MIT?). He was a professor of Economics and International Affairs at Princeton. He was a centenary professor at the London School of Economics (and try as I might, I can not find a definition for centenary professor….only one comes around every 100 years?... not likely… anyone?). He has also taught at Yale, MIT, UC Berkley, and Stanford. He won a Nobel Prize in Economics. In 2005 he was voted 6th in a list of the worlds 100 top intellectuals by Prospect, a brainy magazine out of Britain. He’s written 20 books and over 200 published articles. Need I go on?
So, that acquaintance thinks he’s a “crackpot” (I wish I could remember the exact words). Does he sound like a crackpot to you or do you think the acquaintance in question is nuts? I think this is yet another example of insanity. The refusal to accept the thoughts of someone far more qualified than you because they don’t mesh with your thoughts. Rather than admit an error on your part, you throw dirt on the guy who really does know better than you. Sounds nuts to me!
Glenn Beck? Whoa…. He’s fucking nuts and you know it.
Finally, let’s talk a little about Scott Lively, president of “Defend the Family” and “Abiding Truth Ministries”. Look Them up… that part isn’t all that relevant. What earns Mr. Lively a solid berth on the last car in the crazy train is his insistence that most Nazis were….. ahem…… homosexuals. That’s right. They were gay. How does he determine this. Because it is “well known” that homosexuals lack the ability to contain rage and they are violent, unconscionable, maniacal, killing machines. That’s right. They’ll fuck you up! In fact, Hitler himself was a homosexual. Most of those in his inner circle were homosexual. They even hooked up in gay bars. They were uncontrollable “rageaholics”.
I saw a revealing (and quite funny) video piece concerning Mr. Lively on “The Daily Show” (which should be required viewing for all Americans). The guy obviously takes himself quite seriously. When it was pointed out that homosexuals were actually persecuted under the Nazis Mr. Lively insists that was a smokescreen to throw us off. My question is where the hell the guy initially got the idea? Hmmm, could it be he was looking for a way to FURTHER persecute the gay and lesbian community? My concern is that there are obviously people out there who believe him. Why does that concern me? You know why. It’s because these morons are allowed full access to society and they are so stupid they are dangerous.
Mr. Lively has written three books. In 2000 he wrote “Why and How to Defeat the Gay Movement”. In 1998 he wrote “Seven Steps to Recruit Proof Your Child: A Parents Guide to Protecting Children From Homosexuality and the Gay Movement” (that one amuses me…. Especially when I reflect on how many times I was “recruited” by the gay movement. It must have happened…. Well… OK, it never happened). But the relevant tome is the one he co-authored in 1996 with Kevin E. Abrams… are you ready…. It’s a hoot….. “The Pink Swastika”. When confronted with historical “fact” or the opinions of historians Mr. Lively has obviously practiced extensively to dodge reality. I think he’s stark raving mad….
Now, what do these people all have in common? A couple of things. Of course the obvious one is that they are living in some alternate reality. They live in a place where all you need to do is think something and it magically becomes true. Big tax increases, moron liberal journalists (or bloggers for that matter), gay Nazis, anything that comes out of Glen Beck’s mouth. Even if you confront them with indisputable facts, they won’t budge an inch. Whatever crazy notion they are pandering remains fact in their puny little minds. Maddening isn’t it?
The other thing they have in common (at least the one that immediately comes to mind) is that they all vote Republican! Do I absolutely, positively, know that for a fact? Well, what do YOU think? Do you think any of these people voted for Obama? Yeah, I thought so.
I’ve mentioned before that Republicans seem to share this trait. No matter how many facts, truths, personal accounts, photographs, sworn testimonies, or anything else you throw at them, they will not budge on their positions once they’ve locked in. I’ve mentioned before that my mother (life long Republican) was like that. What’s worse, it doesn’t matter if you show them video of themselves in direct conflict with the “position de jour” (as John Stewart LOVES to do… I’m telling you, required viewing) they will keep their heels dug in and babble some incoherent rationale that attempts to discredit the video of themselves that proves them to be idiots.
But here is the killer…. And it’s a doozy…. Despite all this, the Democrats are once again facing trouble in the mid terms. The stock market is up. The economy has shown definitive signs of recovery. Iraq is winding down (never mind that once we leave the shit will really start hitting the fan). We have a guy in the White House who can spell. I could sit here and reel off all sorts of positive things but it doesn’t matter. “Change” didn’t come fast enough. Never mind that the right stone cold road blocked every piece of legislation to come out of the administration. Landmark health care legislation did manage to get passed but the right has lied about it and distorted it’s reality to the point that people won’t realize positives for a few years. Things are incredibly better than they were when THE MORON left office but it just doesn’t matter.
The Republicans are even fighting to keep the Bush Tax Cuts for those wealthy enough to actually AFFORD paying taxes and they tell you the economic stimulus created by those taxes offset the loss in revenue. Bull shit. One thing that’s going on that I don’t like is the record setting deficits. But I believe we can recover from this with sound fiscal policy going forward. Tax cuts for the wealthy, when we need revenue, is NOT sound fiscal policy.
So please. I’m begging you. I’m on my knees (get your minds out of the gutter). My hands are together in prayer. When you vote in November, think about things like degrees, Nobel Prizes, intellect, well constructed speech, leading by example, Nazis that were straight and not gay, and open your eyes to the constant stream of unmitigated bull shit the right stuffs down your throat on a daily basis. Ask yourself if things are in fact better today. Ask yourself if you want people making over 200 grand a year getting tax breaks. Ask yourself if you want our country run by corporations. Ask yourself if Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, Glenn Beck, and Scott Lively are the types of people you want influencing the machinations of government. Ask yourselves all these questions before you pull the trigger. Then PLEASE vote for Democrats. If the Republicans do take over, sell all your stock (and remember you heard it here first).
Peace,
Common Sense
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
To Tea, or Not To Tea....
I just got a message from an old friend that he misses my blogs. I told him I do too! I’ve just been so very busy with other things. But I promised him there was a new one around the corner and there’s certainly enough inspiration out there so… here goes…. This is for you Mr. B! Where to begin… Hmmmmmm......
How about Mark Williams! I guess Mark Williams headed up what was known as the “Tea Party Express”. As you know, I have hypothesized that the Tea Party harbors racists (and morons… more on that later). There’s been some chatter about that of late due to a blog post by Mr. Williams. Now, to be fair to the Tea Party, they have in fact “expelled” both Mr. Williams AND the Tea Party Express from their ranks. Of course, they had little choice. Mr. Williams, in his blog, wrote a letter from the “colored people” to Abraham Lincoln. It said, in part “We Coloreds have taken a vote and decided that we don't cotton to that whole emancipation thing. Freedom means having to work for real, think for ourselves, and take consequences along with the rewards. That is just far too much to ask of us Colored People and we demand that it stop!”
David Webb of the National Tea Party Federation was quoted saying “We, in the last 24 hours, have expelled Tea Party Express and Mark Williams from the National Tea Party Federation because of the letter that he wrote which he, I guess, may have considered satire but which was clearly offensive."
First of all, let’s define satire, just in case Mr. Williams did in fact intend his piece to be satirical as Mr. Webb “guesses”. According to various sources on the web (because it’s getting harder to read my dictionary and it’s a pain in the ass to wear my glasses when doing this since the computer screen is in that vague zone between the bifocals that doesn’t allow sight when wearing them. You can see close, you can see far, but you can’t see in between….)
Satire: sarcasm: witty language used to convey insults or scorn. A literary technique of writing or art which principally ridicules its subject often as an intended means of provoking or preventing change. A literary work which belittles or savagely attacks its subject. A distinction is sometimes made between direct and indirect satire. Ah Ha! Direct vs. Indirect. Maybe there is salvation there for Mrs. Williams and Webb!
Direct—satire is directly stated
Indirect satire is communicated through characters in a situation
OK, no salvation there. Let’s go back to Satire…
A literary work which exposes and ridicules human vices or folly. Historically perceived as tending toward didacticism, it is usually intended as a moral criticism directed against the injustice or social wrongs. It may be written with witty jocularity or with anger and bitterness. ...
Hmmmm…. Is it possible that Mr. Williams was trying to communicate to the rest of the world the injustice of inaccurate perceptions that African Americans are incapable of hard work, sound decisions, and accepting consequences? Is it possible that Mr. Williams was doing Black America a favor by calling attention to ill gotten perceptions about “Coloreds”? Of course not. Mr. Williams is a fucking racist! Read the paragraph again. It’s satire all right. It’s a literary work which belittles or savagely attacks its subject.
But what about Mr. Webb? That’s a tougher one. Mr. Webb did the right thing. He eighty-sixed the guy and his fringe group. But he also had to interject the explanatory “which he, I guess, may have considered satire”. Why did he do that? It almost sounds as if he was trying to afford Mr. Williams some consideration that the screw up wasn’t as severe as it appeared. Hey Mr. Williams! IT WAS. It was terribly severe! And your attempt to diminish that, even if ever so slightly, is a sign that you too are likely a fucking racist! Mr. Williams blog post was blatantly and powerfully racist and you’re response needed to be just as blatant and powerful, in fact, probably MORE blatant and powerful , if you wanted to convince us that the Tea Party is not a racist organization. What Mr. Webb should have said was something like “Mr. Williams blog was extremely offensive in its content and in no way conveys the attitude of the Tea Party Federation. Mr. Williams is obviously a fucking racist and we, as an organization, are hopeful that a truckload of “Coloreds” will beat the living shit out of the guy and any other person of similar mind that might be harbored within our federation or its fringe. In fact, I’m heading over to Mr. Williams place right now to get the ball rolling and any Negroes out there who want to join me are more than welcome”. (Note my satirical use of the words Coloreds and Negroes to convey Mr. Webb’s tendency towards racism)
So, in the spirit of satire, here’s my take on a letter from the Tea Party to America (remember, I promised more on the moronic element).
Dear Amerika,
We the peeple of the tee party want you, the peeple of amerika to no we, the peeple of the tee party are sik and tired of you lies and thiefing. And Obama is a muzlem!!! Who was born in muzlemville! Not Amerika!!!! You, the peeple of Amerika need to no that we, the peeple of the tee party think librals are stinkee shit heds!!!! Librals are stoopid. Thay think Obama was born in Hawii, uh…. Hawwae, uh…. Ho-y-ee…. Uh, YOU NO WHUT WE MEEN! And were sik and tired of you librals saying Sarah Palin is stoopid. That’s stoopid. To say Sarah Palin is stoopid is stoopid! She’s not stoopid. She’s a genus! And she wud make a great preseedant!
We the peeple of the tee party don’t want no more taxes. Taxes are bad. Thay take our money and spend it on welfare and ileegal imgrants from Mexco and Muzlemville! Then thay give them free helth care and food stamps. Thay shud work for monee like we doo! And about helth care! Why did you go an scru up our helth care? Now Granpa Floyd will haf ta go stand in front of that deth panal and ask if he can go ahead and live for a couple more months, evan tho hes almost 90! But thay will probly kil him on the spot cus of that pussy thing on his face.
We the peeple of the tee party want to go bak and make Sarah Palin and that other old guy presidant and vise presidant, not Obama the Muzlem who was bored in Muzlemville! Sarah Palin wud make a great presidant. Sheeze not a jooish muzlem. She can see Russia and has sex with Joe the Plummer! We like Joe the Plummer cause he….he…he… OK, wee don’t no why we like him but we do. Cause the old guy, that frend of Sarah Palin who plays poker like that mavrik guy on TV says Plummer Joe is a good guy.
We the peeple of the tee party want to saseed and start our own cuntree. We will call it teepartyville! Eny one that lives there hasta be a tee party persun. NO LIBRALS. Librals are stoopid. And no blak peeple or mynoritees ‘cause theyr all on welfare and food stamps and drink malt likker and fourtifyed wine! They get drunk and steel our tax monee and stuff and burn skools and let peeple frum muzlemville blo up arplanes! With theyr feet! Stinkee feet bombs! It’s disgusting! Theyr stoopid!
So that’s all aMerika. We the peeple of the tee party heerby state that wee are going to start teepartyville now. We think weel start with Mrs. Sippee, Al Abama, and Jorja then maybe move into looeeseeana cus theres oil there for fryin. If that’s OK with Sarah Palin and the mavrick.
Thank You.
The Tee Party Peeple
Peace,
Common Sense
How about Mark Williams! I guess Mark Williams headed up what was known as the “Tea Party Express”. As you know, I have hypothesized that the Tea Party harbors racists (and morons… more on that later). There’s been some chatter about that of late due to a blog post by Mr. Williams. Now, to be fair to the Tea Party, they have in fact “expelled” both Mr. Williams AND the Tea Party Express from their ranks. Of course, they had little choice. Mr. Williams, in his blog, wrote a letter from the “colored people” to Abraham Lincoln. It said, in part “We Coloreds have taken a vote and decided that we don't cotton to that whole emancipation thing. Freedom means having to work for real, think for ourselves, and take consequences along with the rewards. That is just far too much to ask of us Colored People and we demand that it stop!”
David Webb of the National Tea Party Federation was quoted saying “We, in the last 24 hours, have expelled Tea Party Express and Mark Williams from the National Tea Party Federation because of the letter that he wrote which he, I guess, may have considered satire but which was clearly offensive."
First of all, let’s define satire, just in case Mr. Williams did in fact intend his piece to be satirical as Mr. Webb “guesses”. According to various sources on the web (because it’s getting harder to read my dictionary and it’s a pain in the ass to wear my glasses when doing this since the computer screen is in that vague zone between the bifocals that doesn’t allow sight when wearing them. You can see close, you can see far, but you can’t see in between….)
Satire: sarcasm: witty language used to convey insults or scorn. A literary technique of writing or art which principally ridicules its subject often as an intended means of provoking or preventing change. A literary work which belittles or savagely attacks its subject. A distinction is sometimes made between direct and indirect satire. Ah Ha! Direct vs. Indirect. Maybe there is salvation there for Mrs. Williams and Webb!
Direct—satire is directly stated
Indirect satire is communicated through characters in a situation
OK, no salvation there. Let’s go back to Satire…
A literary work which exposes and ridicules human vices or folly. Historically perceived as tending toward didacticism, it is usually intended as a moral criticism directed against the injustice or social wrongs. It may be written with witty jocularity or with anger and bitterness. ...
Hmmmm…. Is it possible that Mr. Williams was trying to communicate to the rest of the world the injustice of inaccurate perceptions that African Americans are incapable of hard work, sound decisions, and accepting consequences? Is it possible that Mr. Williams was doing Black America a favor by calling attention to ill gotten perceptions about “Coloreds”? Of course not. Mr. Williams is a fucking racist! Read the paragraph again. It’s satire all right. It’s a literary work which belittles or savagely attacks its subject.
But what about Mr. Webb? That’s a tougher one. Mr. Webb did the right thing. He eighty-sixed the guy and his fringe group. But he also had to interject the explanatory “which he, I guess, may have considered satire”. Why did he do that? It almost sounds as if he was trying to afford Mr. Williams some consideration that the screw up wasn’t as severe as it appeared. Hey Mr. Williams! IT WAS. It was terribly severe! And your attempt to diminish that, even if ever so slightly, is a sign that you too are likely a fucking racist! Mr. Williams blog post was blatantly and powerfully racist and you’re response needed to be just as blatant and powerful, in fact, probably MORE blatant and powerful , if you wanted to convince us that the Tea Party is not a racist organization. What Mr. Webb should have said was something like “Mr. Williams blog was extremely offensive in its content and in no way conveys the attitude of the Tea Party Federation. Mr. Williams is obviously a fucking racist and we, as an organization, are hopeful that a truckload of “Coloreds” will beat the living shit out of the guy and any other person of similar mind that might be harbored within our federation or its fringe. In fact, I’m heading over to Mr. Williams place right now to get the ball rolling and any Negroes out there who want to join me are more than welcome”. (Note my satirical use of the words Coloreds and Negroes to convey Mr. Webb’s tendency towards racism)
So, in the spirit of satire, here’s my take on a letter from the Tea Party to America (remember, I promised more on the moronic element).
Dear Amerika,
We the peeple of the tee party want you, the peeple of amerika to no we, the peeple of the tee party are sik and tired of you lies and thiefing. And Obama is a muzlem!!! Who was born in muzlemville! Not Amerika!!!! You, the peeple of Amerika need to no that we, the peeple of the tee party think librals are stinkee shit heds!!!! Librals are stoopid. Thay think Obama was born in Hawii, uh…. Hawwae, uh…. Ho-y-ee…. Uh, YOU NO WHUT WE MEEN! And were sik and tired of you librals saying Sarah Palin is stoopid. That’s stoopid. To say Sarah Palin is stoopid is stoopid! She’s not stoopid. She’s a genus! And she wud make a great preseedant!
We the peeple of the tee party don’t want no more taxes. Taxes are bad. Thay take our money and spend it on welfare and ileegal imgrants from Mexco and Muzlemville! Then thay give them free helth care and food stamps. Thay shud work for monee like we doo! And about helth care! Why did you go an scru up our helth care? Now Granpa Floyd will haf ta go stand in front of that deth panal and ask if he can go ahead and live for a couple more months, evan tho hes almost 90! But thay will probly kil him on the spot cus of that pussy thing on his face.
We the peeple of the tee party want to go bak and make Sarah Palin and that other old guy presidant and vise presidant, not Obama the Muzlem who was bored in Muzlemville! Sarah Palin wud make a great presidant. Sheeze not a jooish muzlem. She can see Russia and has sex with Joe the Plummer! We like Joe the Plummer cause he….he…he… OK, wee don’t no why we like him but we do. Cause the old guy, that frend of Sarah Palin who plays poker like that mavrik guy on TV says Plummer Joe is a good guy.
We the peeple of the tee party want to saseed and start our own cuntree. We will call it teepartyville! Eny one that lives there hasta be a tee party persun. NO LIBRALS. Librals are stoopid. And no blak peeple or mynoritees ‘cause theyr all on welfare and food stamps and drink malt likker and fourtifyed wine! They get drunk and steel our tax monee and stuff and burn skools and let peeple frum muzlemville blo up arplanes! With theyr feet! Stinkee feet bombs! It’s disgusting! Theyr stoopid!
So that’s all aMerika. We the peeple of the tee party heerby state that wee are going to start teepartyville now. We think weel start with Mrs. Sippee, Al Abama, and Jorja then maybe move into looeeseeana cus theres oil there for fryin. If that’s OK with Sarah Palin and the mavrick.
Thank You.
The Tee Party Peeple
Peace,
Common Sense
Saturday, June 26, 2010
The Emperor's New What?
I find myself incredulous at the Republican response to Obama’s creation of a BP funded relief fund for their epic spill. Actually, incredulous may be an understatement. I’m raging really. Just how bad is the GOP (in its current form) for America? But that’s not even what I’m raging about. I’m raging about the fact that despite the increasingly obvious faults with that party, the magnitudes of morons in the US of A continue to keep it viable. There’s speculation that they may regain control of the house and senate in November. How is this possible? In the wake of an economic meltdown due, in part, to a lack of financial regulation, the GOP has a chance? In the wake of what will certainly become the worst environmental catastrophe in the history of the United States, very much due to a lack of regulation and the failure to enforce existing regulations the GOP has a chance? In the wake of Joe Barton apologizing to BP the GOP has a chance?
Michelle Bachman called it a “redistribution of wealth” fund. She went on to say BP should tell us “We’re not going to be chumps and we’re not going to be fleeced”. Really Michelle? This is the same woman who argued that carbon dioxide is a “natural” ingredient of our atmosphere and therefore carbon emissions are no big deal. I wouldn’t hire this idiot to shovel shit.
Rush Limbaugh said it will be a “slush fund”. He wanted to know “Who’s going to get this money? Union activists? Acorn people?” Yeah, that’s right fatso. Union activists and little people who live in trees are going to get the money. Screw the chumps on the Gulf Coast.
The chairman of the Republican Study Committee, a group of anal retentive douche bags, came out and said it was representative of the Obama administration being “hard at work exerting its brand of Chicago-style shakedown politics.” That’s right asshole. The administration is trying to insure some degree of accountability on the part of BP. Insiders tell me that while Tony Hayward was sailing off the coast of Great Britain, Michelle Obama was on a covert op kidnapping Tony’s grandmother and holding her in the White House’s basement torture chamber. She was heard screaming “don’t fuck with me you old bitch! I’ll pull your fucking finger nails out with my teeth! Yo Rahm. Pass me another ‘Chicago style’ brewski…. And shake it down baby!”
What the hell is wrong with America? How is it possible that GOP devotees don’t see the insanity of these statements? How is it possible that the party that preaches less government regulation has a viable chance at anything in the wake of the economic meltdown and the worst environmental catastrophe in the history of the United States? What am I missing? Am I the one who’s insane?
Getting back to Joe Barton out of Texas (because I’m REALLY incredulous over this one). He apologized to BP? Apologized? Huh? WTF? Apologized? As a nation, we should be standing hand in hand, condemning these bastards regardless of party affiliation. Apologized? Am I dreaming this shit or is it really happening?
You want to observe a difference between the GOP and the Democrats? Harkin back to the onset of the Iraqi war. When our Congressmen and women voted on the Iraq Resolution, 215 Republicans voted yes, 6 voted no, and 2 didn’t vote. On the left side of the House, 82 voted yes, 126 voted no, and one didn’t vote. One independent voted no. In the Senate, 48 Republicans voted yes, and one voted no. Among Democrats 29 voted yes and 21 voted no. Again, one independent voted no. What’s my point? Well, do you notice how Republicans band together?
Need another example. Look at the recently passed health bill. Not one single Republican Congressman or woman voted in favor of it. Not one. Hell, 34 Democrats voted against it but not one Republican voted for it. Notice a pattern here? Need I go on? Democrats vote on what’s in a bill. Republicans vote based on which party endorses the bill. It’s bull shit and I don’t understand why more Americans don’t see it. There had to be Republicans in the general population that didn’t condemn the bill. Why NONE in Congress?
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. I’m not that far left! I’ve voted for Republicans in the past. I have some right leaning views on immigration, law enforcement, gun control, the “Muslim question”, and several other issues. But in all things, I believe the well being of America should be a priority and when I see party line votes (be they left or right) I don’t like it.
The ignorance I see coming out of the GOP is staggering. Arizona Governor Jan Brewer was quoted saying that most of the illegal immigrants coming here from Mexico are smuggling drugs. "Well, we all know that the majority of the people that are coming to Arizona and trespassing are now becoming drug mules. They're coming across our borders in huge numbers. The drug cartels have taken control of the immigration. So they are criminals. They're breaking the law when they are trespassing and they're criminals when they pack the marijuana and the drugs on their backs." This woman is a fucking governor? Who elected her? How stupid do you have to be to vote for someone so stupid?
Anyone with specific knowledge on the demographics of illegal immigration from Mexico, including representatives of the Border Patrol has stated this isn’t true. But the idiot from Arizona has repeatedly stuck to her guns. "The simple truth is that the majority of human smuggling in our state is under the direction of the drug cartels, which are by definition smuggling drugs. It is common knowledge that Mexican drug cartels have merged human smuggling with drug trafficking." In the interest of brevity, I won’t get into numbers but ask yourselves this. Why do people come here from Mexico? What do they do when they get here? Would they, en masse, do something that greatly increases the odds that their quest for a better life will be futile? Besides, just thinking in terms of volume the position is ludicrous. Yet she sticks to it. Incredible really don’t you think?
So, I’m beginning to feel like the kid in “The Emperor’s New Clothes”. Listen up people. The GOP is not wearing a nice new suit. They’re naked. Please, don’t lower yourselves to that level. The only way they will change is through your votes. It’s a shame really. I mean some of their dogma has merit. But they’ve made such complete ass holes out of themselves that until they clean it up, no one should care. Vote for the Democrats and the Independents. Send a message for crying out loud.
Peace,
Common Sense
Michelle Bachman called it a “redistribution of wealth” fund. She went on to say BP should tell us “We’re not going to be chumps and we’re not going to be fleeced”. Really Michelle? This is the same woman who argued that carbon dioxide is a “natural” ingredient of our atmosphere and therefore carbon emissions are no big deal. I wouldn’t hire this idiot to shovel shit.
Rush Limbaugh said it will be a “slush fund”. He wanted to know “Who’s going to get this money? Union activists? Acorn people?” Yeah, that’s right fatso. Union activists and little people who live in trees are going to get the money. Screw the chumps on the Gulf Coast.
The chairman of the Republican Study Committee, a group of anal retentive douche bags, came out and said it was representative of the Obama administration being “hard at work exerting its brand of Chicago-style shakedown politics.” That’s right asshole. The administration is trying to insure some degree of accountability on the part of BP. Insiders tell me that while Tony Hayward was sailing off the coast of Great Britain, Michelle Obama was on a covert op kidnapping Tony’s grandmother and holding her in the White House’s basement torture chamber. She was heard screaming “don’t fuck with me you old bitch! I’ll pull your fucking finger nails out with my teeth! Yo Rahm. Pass me another ‘Chicago style’ brewski…. And shake it down baby!”
What the hell is wrong with America? How is it possible that GOP devotees don’t see the insanity of these statements? How is it possible that the party that preaches less government regulation has a viable chance at anything in the wake of the economic meltdown and the worst environmental catastrophe in the history of the United States? What am I missing? Am I the one who’s insane?
Getting back to Joe Barton out of Texas (because I’m REALLY incredulous over this one). He apologized to BP? Apologized? Huh? WTF? Apologized? As a nation, we should be standing hand in hand, condemning these bastards regardless of party affiliation. Apologized? Am I dreaming this shit or is it really happening?
You want to observe a difference between the GOP and the Democrats? Harkin back to the onset of the Iraqi war. When our Congressmen and women voted on the Iraq Resolution, 215 Republicans voted yes, 6 voted no, and 2 didn’t vote. On the left side of the House, 82 voted yes, 126 voted no, and one didn’t vote. One independent voted no. In the Senate, 48 Republicans voted yes, and one voted no. Among Democrats 29 voted yes and 21 voted no. Again, one independent voted no. What’s my point? Well, do you notice how Republicans band together?
Need another example. Look at the recently passed health bill. Not one single Republican Congressman or woman voted in favor of it. Not one. Hell, 34 Democrats voted against it but not one Republican voted for it. Notice a pattern here? Need I go on? Democrats vote on what’s in a bill. Republicans vote based on which party endorses the bill. It’s bull shit and I don’t understand why more Americans don’t see it. There had to be Republicans in the general population that didn’t condemn the bill. Why NONE in Congress?
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. I’m not that far left! I’ve voted for Republicans in the past. I have some right leaning views on immigration, law enforcement, gun control, the “Muslim question”, and several other issues. But in all things, I believe the well being of America should be a priority and when I see party line votes (be they left or right) I don’t like it.
The ignorance I see coming out of the GOP is staggering. Arizona Governor Jan Brewer was quoted saying that most of the illegal immigrants coming here from Mexico are smuggling drugs. "Well, we all know that the majority of the people that are coming to Arizona and trespassing are now becoming drug mules. They're coming across our borders in huge numbers. The drug cartels have taken control of the immigration. So they are criminals. They're breaking the law when they are trespassing and they're criminals when they pack the marijuana and the drugs on their backs." This woman is a fucking governor? Who elected her? How stupid do you have to be to vote for someone so stupid?
Anyone with specific knowledge on the demographics of illegal immigration from Mexico, including representatives of the Border Patrol has stated this isn’t true. But the idiot from Arizona has repeatedly stuck to her guns. "The simple truth is that the majority of human smuggling in our state is under the direction of the drug cartels, which are by definition smuggling drugs. It is common knowledge that Mexican drug cartels have merged human smuggling with drug trafficking." In the interest of brevity, I won’t get into numbers but ask yourselves this. Why do people come here from Mexico? What do they do when they get here? Would they, en masse, do something that greatly increases the odds that their quest for a better life will be futile? Besides, just thinking in terms of volume the position is ludicrous. Yet she sticks to it. Incredible really don’t you think?
So, I’m beginning to feel like the kid in “The Emperor’s New Clothes”. Listen up people. The GOP is not wearing a nice new suit. They’re naked. Please, don’t lower yourselves to that level. The only way they will change is through your votes. It’s a shame really. I mean some of their dogma has merit. But they’ve made such complete ass holes out of themselves that until they clean it up, no one should care. Vote for the Democrats and the Independents. Send a message for crying out loud.
Peace,
Common Sense
Monday, June 7, 2010
BP=Big Profits=Big Problem
It’s been awhile since I posted because I have been quite busy with other things. Extremely busy as a matter of fact. But I can’t stay silent on this oil spill any longer. I’m far beyond outraged. Outraged is a tiny speck in my rear view mirror. Clean up of this fucking mess will take YEARS and YEARS and YEARS. BP is a joke. I read with interest a recent article focused on the opinions of Scott West, a former investigator for the EPA. Mr. West retired in 2008 after 18 years of service and insists that throughout his tenure he repeatedly saw BP “skirt the law and cut corners”. In fact, he specifically states that the current crisis was “a disaster waiting to happen” and that BP is, in his opinion, a “serial environmental criminal”. How’s this for a quote? “"If I was still on the job and had the area of the gulf, the day I heard this I would've started a criminal investigation just because of the fact that it was BP. If it was Shell or anyone else, I would've monitored it. But the fact that it's BP, I would have assumed it's criminal and started an investigation before evidence disappeared."
If that isn’t enough, in 1999 BP was convicted of dumping hazardous waste on Alaska’s North Slope. I took the following directly from the EPA’s website. “BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc., or “BPXA,” admitted in U.S. District Court in Anchorage that it failed to immediately notify authorities of a release of hazardous substances to the environment, and it agreed to pay the maximum criminal fine of $500,000. As part of the plea agreement, BPXA also admitted that it failed to provide adequate oversight, audits and funding to ensure proper environmental management on Endicott Island, Alaska.” They injected a bunch of very nasty stuff into an old oil well. Here’s a link to the page. There are several things in there that should make you sick.
http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/016bcfb1deb9fecd85256aca005d74df/5d61856989631e20852567f6004bbbff?OpenDocument
Moving on, 6 years after the conviction Mr. West gathered intelligence from BP employees regarding a burst pipeline in Alaska. According to them they had registered complaints about the faulty pipe and were told to ignore it! Apparently, if you know about a “condition” prior to it becoming a “problem “ that constitutes a felony. Here’s the kicker… the Department of Justice shut down his probe of the incident before he could take it anywhere! Hmmm…. Whose Department of Justice was this? Why it was THE MORON’s DOJ. What a shock. BP dumps a bunch of oil in the wilderness of Alaska and THE MORON doesn’t want to prosecute. I’m shocked, how about you?
Prior to that, in 2005 there was a fatal explosion at a Texas refinery that can also be pinned on BP. Rather than boring you with all the details, why don’t you just Google BP screw ups and see for yourself. This company needs to be held accountable. And we can’t be talking about $500,000 fines for a company that operates in “billion dollar land”. It’s time to get serious.
If you continue to dig into this what you will find is there are “whistle blowers” out there who have been yelling about BP’s disregard for safety protocol and they have been yelling for awhile. One in particular raised concerns about this particular well's lack of paperwork and documentation. It appears to me that BP’s attitude has been one of minimizing expenses, regardless of risk, and if the shit hits the fan so what? Billions have been made and will continue to be made because hey, BP is bullet proof.
Eric Holder has stated a criminal probe has begun. Mr. West says that’s not likely as no one is hearing about subpoenas, task forces, or FBI visits. His take is that something very big is at work to keep these things covered up. Let’s hope the Obama administration breaks that shit down pronto. We need to raise hell and insist that a criminal investigation moves forward.
Remember when the second dumbest member of the GOP was chanting “drill baby drill”? I remember having a debate around that with that online forum I’ve mentioned repeatedly (see previous posts). One of the conservatives was insistent that it was the only way to cut off our dependency on foreign oil. I said no, alternative energy sources were the answer. As the debate heated up I pointed out that when the disaster occurred my only hope was that it was HIS beachfront property in the path of the spill. The guy doesn’t own beachfront property. But when I sent out a query about his thoughts, now that the disaster had occurred, it was met with dead silence.
And speaking of the second dumbest member of the GOP... do you know what her take on this is? It’s the environmentalists fault. That’s right. If the environmentalists hadn’t pitched a fit we would be drilling in shallower and safer waters and this never would have happened (I can not for the life of me comprehend how someone so stupid can garner that much positive attention). Never mind BP’s track record. Never mind their blatant disregard for safety and accountability. Apparently if they had been drilling in safer waters they would have had a change of heart and put safety in front of profits.
So, where am I going with all of this? Glad you asked. For all you conservatives out there who insist government is too intrusive and needs to stay out of our business, I say “why don’t you just go give yourselves a royal fucking?” It seems to me if government had been MORE involved in the oversight of this industry then perhaps we wouldn’t be looking at photographs of chocolate coated pelicans. The entire coast of Louisiana wouldn’t be looking at economic ruin. Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida wouldn’t be thinking “we’re next”. As I said, we will be dealing with the effects of this disaster for YEARS. And the thing that pisses me off the most is the possibility that BP will still be a profitable business going forward. When you conservatives are done fucking yourselves, go fuck BP.
Peace,
Common Sense
If that isn’t enough, in 1999 BP was convicted of dumping hazardous waste on Alaska’s North Slope. I took the following directly from the EPA’s website. “BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc., or “BPXA,” admitted in U.S. District Court in Anchorage that it failed to immediately notify authorities of a release of hazardous substances to the environment, and it agreed to pay the maximum criminal fine of $500,000. As part of the plea agreement, BPXA also admitted that it failed to provide adequate oversight, audits and funding to ensure proper environmental management on Endicott Island, Alaska.” They injected a bunch of very nasty stuff into an old oil well. Here’s a link to the page. There are several things in there that should make you sick.
http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/016bcfb1deb9fecd85256aca005d74df/5d61856989631e20852567f6004bbbff?OpenDocument
Moving on, 6 years after the conviction Mr. West gathered intelligence from BP employees regarding a burst pipeline in Alaska. According to them they had registered complaints about the faulty pipe and were told to ignore it! Apparently, if you know about a “condition” prior to it becoming a “problem “ that constitutes a felony. Here’s the kicker… the Department of Justice shut down his probe of the incident before he could take it anywhere! Hmmm…. Whose Department of Justice was this? Why it was THE MORON’s DOJ. What a shock. BP dumps a bunch of oil in the wilderness of Alaska and THE MORON doesn’t want to prosecute. I’m shocked, how about you?
Prior to that, in 2005 there was a fatal explosion at a Texas refinery that can also be pinned on BP. Rather than boring you with all the details, why don’t you just Google BP screw ups and see for yourself. This company needs to be held accountable. And we can’t be talking about $500,000 fines for a company that operates in “billion dollar land”. It’s time to get serious.
If you continue to dig into this what you will find is there are “whistle blowers” out there who have been yelling about BP’s disregard for safety protocol and they have been yelling for awhile. One in particular raised concerns about this particular well's lack of paperwork and documentation. It appears to me that BP’s attitude has been one of minimizing expenses, regardless of risk, and if the shit hits the fan so what? Billions have been made and will continue to be made because hey, BP is bullet proof.
Eric Holder has stated a criminal probe has begun. Mr. West says that’s not likely as no one is hearing about subpoenas, task forces, or FBI visits. His take is that something very big is at work to keep these things covered up. Let’s hope the Obama administration breaks that shit down pronto. We need to raise hell and insist that a criminal investigation moves forward.
Remember when the second dumbest member of the GOP was chanting “drill baby drill”? I remember having a debate around that with that online forum I’ve mentioned repeatedly (see previous posts). One of the conservatives was insistent that it was the only way to cut off our dependency on foreign oil. I said no, alternative energy sources were the answer. As the debate heated up I pointed out that when the disaster occurred my only hope was that it was HIS beachfront property in the path of the spill. The guy doesn’t own beachfront property. But when I sent out a query about his thoughts, now that the disaster had occurred, it was met with dead silence.
And speaking of the second dumbest member of the GOP... do you know what her take on this is? It’s the environmentalists fault. That’s right. If the environmentalists hadn’t pitched a fit we would be drilling in shallower and safer waters and this never would have happened (I can not for the life of me comprehend how someone so stupid can garner that much positive attention). Never mind BP’s track record. Never mind their blatant disregard for safety and accountability. Apparently if they had been drilling in safer waters they would have had a change of heart and put safety in front of profits.
So, where am I going with all of this? Glad you asked. For all you conservatives out there who insist government is too intrusive and needs to stay out of our business, I say “why don’t you just go give yourselves a royal fucking?” It seems to me if government had been MORE involved in the oversight of this industry then perhaps we wouldn’t be looking at photographs of chocolate coated pelicans. The entire coast of Louisiana wouldn’t be looking at economic ruin. Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida wouldn’t be thinking “we’re next”. As I said, we will be dealing with the effects of this disaster for YEARS. And the thing that pisses me off the most is the possibility that BP will still be a profitable business going forward. When you conservatives are done fucking yourselves, go fuck BP.
Peace,
Common Sense
Friday, April 30, 2010
Let Me In, Immigration Man (Crosby, Stills, and Nash...FYI)
Well, this is a hot one isn’t it? Arizona’s new law will be stimulating some serious debate over the next few months. It will likely be challenged but I’m not even close to the knowledge required in Constitutional Law to predict the outcome. But I will say this, and it may shock some of you…. I’m kind of split on this one.
Now before you throw me to the wolves, let me first state that I don’t SUPPORT it. I’m just not sure I’m vehemently against it. The cons are glaring. It will promote racial profiling. They say it won’t but we all know it will. I can see the banter in court now. “He only checked my immigration status because I’m Mexican”. But how do you prove that, especially when the cop will be denying it. It’s a given that citizens and legal immigrants will be hassled. I don’t like either of these scenarios.
But here’s the rub. If you are here illegally, you are breaking the law. It’s really pretty black and white. You either entered the country legally, or you didn’t. It seems that half the country wants to deport and the other half wants to grant amnesty. I see problems with both.
If we grant amnesty, what kind of message does that send? And what does it do to curb the problem going forward? In fact, if we go this route, wouldn’t that encourage those that want in to try even harder? I believe those that preach this remedy say that a “drop dead date” would need to be established and anyone coming forward after that would be assumed to have entered the country AFTER the amnesty was granted. But I see a whole lot of expense and legal wrangling in our future with or without a drop dead date. It will be messy, to say the least. Just consider the numbers. Currently, an estimated 12 – 20 million undocumented aliens are in the USA. That’s a lot of amnesty!
But it’s a lot of deportation too. Who covers THAT expense? And how do we round all these people up? Deportation is a messy business as well. What about parents who have had children here? Are the kids citizens? I think they are. But the parents are not (and please feel free to jump in here if I’m getting any of this wrong). We don’t really want to split up families but that would invariably happen I’m sure. People might choose to leave their kids with friends and relatives so they can enjoy the opportunities here that aren’t available in their countries of origin. And you know they would try to sneak back in. It will be like bailing out a leaky boat.
I was reading an op-ed piece today that basically said everyone needs to chill. The law isn’t that bad. I was buying into it 100% until I got to the part that stated the Obama administration is at fault for not protecting the interests and security of Arizonans. Then I realized it was written by a right wing douche bag. Did this problem just recently present itself? Is this a number one priority for the administration? When Obama took office we were engaged in two wars, the economy was in the toilet, and the health care debate took on a life of its own (anybody see any “death panels” yet)? Was illegal immigration supposed to trump all of that? What did THE MORON do about it when he was running the show? Put up a little fence?
I’m not sold on either side of this issue but I do think we have an immigration problem and there is shit going on out there that really annoys the hell out of me. If I do business in this country, I should be able to understand who I’m speaking with. All too often I find myself on the phone, or in a bank, or at a restaurant, or a drive through window, or a convenience store, or a myriad of other places and I can’t understand what the person I’m dealing with is saying. It’s one thing if you’re on the phone with a call center in India. I mean, that sucks too but WTF… the people you’re talking to are from India! But when I’m talking to someone in Chicago…
I also think we are too crowded as it is. I’m old enough to remember what it was like when it wasn’t this crowded. You could find parking. Traffic was nothing like it is today. Going to the “country” didn’t take as long because development hadn’t reached out as far as it has now. Twelve to twenty million people is around 7 percent of the population. That seems like a lot to me.
I encountered a situation several years ago that really pissed me off. My neighborhood had experienced some mail theft so I, along with two neighbors, took it upon ourselves to rebuild the frame that houses our mailboxes and replace the old ones with locking boxes. We did the frame work at our expense. The boxes were around 70 bucks each. Every neighbor was eager to get it done. I mean, who wants to get their mail stolen right? Every neighbor, except one. And that neighbor happened to be a somewhat recent immigrant. In fact, they were recent enough to not speak a whole lot of English. You know what they said? They said they shouldn’t have to pay for the mailbox. The government should.
Now, it’s entirely possible that at some subliminal level this is why I’m split on the issue. I’ve lived here all my life and never once did I even remotely entertain the possibility that the government should pay for my mailbox! We wound up getting him a new NON-locking mailbox that was black so it would at least match colors with the others in the frame. And yes we paid for it. I hope he suffered repeated mail theft for the remainder of his stay in the neighborhood (the family has since moved).
So, what do we do? I don’t think we can deport all these people. We don’t have the resources or the money to do it. But if we grant them amnesty, it sends a dangerous message that could encourage even more illegal immigration. I think the answer lies in better securing our borders. And we have a shit load of border to secure. That might not be possible either. But I bet the billions and billions of dollars spent on Iraq and Afghanistan would have gotten us off to a good start!
Feel free to weigh in on this one. It’s a tough issue. Maybe you can help me decide where I stand on it. I’m a pretty humane individual so I think I’m leaning towards the amnesty. But for crying out loud, if we go that route, I’m hoping fluency in English will be included in the package. I hear they hate us in France, in part because we don’t speak French. Hey, I get it…..
Peace,
Common Sense
Now before you throw me to the wolves, let me first state that I don’t SUPPORT it. I’m just not sure I’m vehemently against it. The cons are glaring. It will promote racial profiling. They say it won’t but we all know it will. I can see the banter in court now. “He only checked my immigration status because I’m Mexican”. But how do you prove that, especially when the cop will be denying it. It’s a given that citizens and legal immigrants will be hassled. I don’t like either of these scenarios.
But here’s the rub. If you are here illegally, you are breaking the law. It’s really pretty black and white. You either entered the country legally, or you didn’t. It seems that half the country wants to deport and the other half wants to grant amnesty. I see problems with both.
If we grant amnesty, what kind of message does that send? And what does it do to curb the problem going forward? In fact, if we go this route, wouldn’t that encourage those that want in to try even harder? I believe those that preach this remedy say that a “drop dead date” would need to be established and anyone coming forward after that would be assumed to have entered the country AFTER the amnesty was granted. But I see a whole lot of expense and legal wrangling in our future with or without a drop dead date. It will be messy, to say the least. Just consider the numbers. Currently, an estimated 12 – 20 million undocumented aliens are in the USA. That’s a lot of amnesty!
But it’s a lot of deportation too. Who covers THAT expense? And how do we round all these people up? Deportation is a messy business as well. What about parents who have had children here? Are the kids citizens? I think they are. But the parents are not (and please feel free to jump in here if I’m getting any of this wrong). We don’t really want to split up families but that would invariably happen I’m sure. People might choose to leave their kids with friends and relatives so they can enjoy the opportunities here that aren’t available in their countries of origin. And you know they would try to sneak back in. It will be like bailing out a leaky boat.
I was reading an op-ed piece today that basically said everyone needs to chill. The law isn’t that bad. I was buying into it 100% until I got to the part that stated the Obama administration is at fault for not protecting the interests and security of Arizonans. Then I realized it was written by a right wing douche bag. Did this problem just recently present itself? Is this a number one priority for the administration? When Obama took office we were engaged in two wars, the economy was in the toilet, and the health care debate took on a life of its own (anybody see any “death panels” yet)? Was illegal immigration supposed to trump all of that? What did THE MORON do about it when he was running the show? Put up a little fence?
I’m not sold on either side of this issue but I do think we have an immigration problem and there is shit going on out there that really annoys the hell out of me. If I do business in this country, I should be able to understand who I’m speaking with. All too often I find myself on the phone, or in a bank, or at a restaurant, or a drive through window, or a convenience store, or a myriad of other places and I can’t understand what the person I’m dealing with is saying. It’s one thing if you’re on the phone with a call center in India. I mean, that sucks too but WTF… the people you’re talking to are from India! But when I’m talking to someone in Chicago…
I also think we are too crowded as it is. I’m old enough to remember what it was like when it wasn’t this crowded. You could find parking. Traffic was nothing like it is today. Going to the “country” didn’t take as long because development hadn’t reached out as far as it has now. Twelve to twenty million people is around 7 percent of the population. That seems like a lot to me.
I encountered a situation several years ago that really pissed me off. My neighborhood had experienced some mail theft so I, along with two neighbors, took it upon ourselves to rebuild the frame that houses our mailboxes and replace the old ones with locking boxes. We did the frame work at our expense. The boxes were around 70 bucks each. Every neighbor was eager to get it done. I mean, who wants to get their mail stolen right? Every neighbor, except one. And that neighbor happened to be a somewhat recent immigrant. In fact, they were recent enough to not speak a whole lot of English. You know what they said? They said they shouldn’t have to pay for the mailbox. The government should.
Now, it’s entirely possible that at some subliminal level this is why I’m split on the issue. I’ve lived here all my life and never once did I even remotely entertain the possibility that the government should pay for my mailbox! We wound up getting him a new NON-locking mailbox that was black so it would at least match colors with the others in the frame. And yes we paid for it. I hope he suffered repeated mail theft for the remainder of his stay in the neighborhood (the family has since moved).
So, what do we do? I don’t think we can deport all these people. We don’t have the resources or the money to do it. But if we grant them amnesty, it sends a dangerous message that could encourage even more illegal immigration. I think the answer lies in better securing our borders. And we have a shit load of border to secure. That might not be possible either. But I bet the billions and billions of dollars spent on Iraq and Afghanistan would have gotten us off to a good start!
Feel free to weigh in on this one. It’s a tough issue. Maybe you can help me decide where I stand on it. I’m a pretty humane individual so I think I’m leaning towards the amnesty. But for crying out loud, if we go that route, I’m hoping fluency in English will be included in the package. I hear they hate us in France, in part because we don’t speak French. Hey, I get it…..
Peace,
Common Sense
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
What's Taxed? My Patience....
The last time I chatted with you we discussed those nasty birthers and whether or not they were all morons. As I stated then, probably not. They are cowards and bigots as well. But I forgot to mention liars. Silly me. Am I forgiven?
When you listen to the right whine and complain about taxes you would think we are all getting a major screw job from the Obama administration. Read the signs at these gatherings of village idiots (more on that later). They don’t want to be taxed. They think they are getting ripped off. Well, read on for more detail (and as promised, I need to thank Greg for the article that supplied this information).
Thanks to the loud volume of the lying, lunatic rants by the right, about a third of the American population think the Obama administration has raised taxes (all of this according to a CBS News/New York Times poll released this month). On the 15th (tax day) thousands of those pesky tea-baggers (who are also comprised mostly of morons but I suspect they house a fair share of bigots, cowards, and liars as well) descended on Washington to protest their heavy tax burden. Around 65% of those yahoos believe the administration has raised taxes.
Are you with me so far? Good. Here is some reality. The only Obama administration policy to impact 2009 tax returns was the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (AKA the stimulus package). This basically provided a tax CUT for 98% of the tax paying citizens of this country. Let’s say that again…. Slowly… so the idiots can follow… 98% of US taxpayers got a tax cut last year. According to William Gale, co-director of the Tax Policy Center and director of the Retirement Security Project at the Brookings Institution, taxes are at their lowest levels for a period extending back 60 years. That would be 1950 (again for you slow ones). Now, we’re obviously talking percentages here, not dollars. But that’s a pretty significant revelation. The lowest level in 60 years? What the fuck are these tea-baggers protesting?
Let’s keep this moving. One third of the Recovery Act was made up of tax credits. Here’s a list…
• An increase in the Earned Income Tax Credit
• An expansion of the Child Tax Credit
• For those who work, the Making Work Pay tax credit offered $400 per individual and $800 per couple
• For those who lost their job, there was a 65 percent tax credit to help cover the cost of health care. The first $2,400 in unemployment benefits went tax-free
• Up to $2,500 under the American Opportunity Credit for students and parents paying for college tuition
• $8,000 for first-time home buyers
• A deduction of state and local taxes paid on a new car
• Up to $1,500 for home improvements to increase energy efficiency
Here’s an impact quote from the article. “Even conservative advocacy group Americans for Tax Reform, which advocates for a single, national flat tax rate, found some praise for the Recovery Act -- specifically for provisions allowing small businesses to write off a wider range of business expenses.”
Whoa! Wait a minute. A conservative group had praise for this thing? WTF?
But wait…. Other conservative economists argue that many of these tax credits are going to people who pay little or no tax to begin with. Apparently nearly half of the people who file federal income taxes pay nothing. Now, the article isn’t clear on whether or not they pay nothing, or nothing in addition to their withholding. Liberals on the other hand say these people are the ones you want to give the biggest break to. They have no option but to spend the money they saved through the credits. When they spend it, guess what gets stimulated!
Now, I love reading stuff that validates what I’ve said in the past. Of course it's the liberal take that's validating me but think about it. Trickle down doesn’t work. Conservatives will argue that if you give the rich a break, they will employ more of the poor. Bullshit. If you give the rich a break, for the most part they just get richer. If you give the less privileged a break, they spend it. When they spend it, it TRICKLES UP. I’ve said it a ton of times. But this is what conservatives don’t like. When you provide relief to the poor and the middle classes, the rich wind up paying more and/ or making less. And here is where conservative like to tell me to go pork myself because I say fuck ‘em. They can AFFORD to pay more. If you tax a guy who makes 30 grand a year at 30 percent he’s left with 20 grand. If you tax a guy who makes 300 grand the same rate he’s left with 200 grand. Taking it a step further, if you tax the 30 grand guy 5 percent (I’m exaggerating for effect) he’s left with 28,500. If you tax the 300 grand guy 50 percent he’s left with 150,000. OK, show of hands… how many of you want to be the 30 grand guy because he’s paying a lower tax rate? Yeah, I thought so.
Now, to take it further. Obama has proposed to allow the tax cuts implemented by THE MORON to expire for individuals making more than 200 grand a year and married couples making more than 250 grand. He has proposed raising the two top tax brackets from 33% and 36% to 35% and 39.6%. He wants an increase on capital gains taxes from 15% to 20% for households making more than 250 grand per year. Finally, he wants to raise the tax on dividend income from 15% to 20%, again for households making more than 250 grand. Is this Socialism? I mean come on. If you are offered 250 grand a year will you turn it down because of the additional 5% in taxes? I guess the ONLY people truly effected in an adverse way are those that made just under the 200 - 250 grand the year before the changes. Boo hoo. They'll get used to it. To quote Mr. T, “I piddy da fools”.
In closing, let’s all take a look at the protest signs so proudly displayed by the tea-baggers. Here’s a link that should provide you with an enjoyable distraction from your busy day. Now, I'm not a perfect speller and my knowledge of the detail that makes for proper English is not what I'd like it to be. I'm sure some of you pick apart these posts! But I'm working on it. And I can assure you if I was to be carrying a sign in public, I would check, recheck, and check again to insure my spelling and grammar were correct. I think I'd also try for more than a thin magic marker and shitty penmanship. Anyway, it's brilliant stuff. They should all write for Hallmark.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/galleries/teabonics_the_flawed_language_of_protest/teabonics_the_flawed_language_of_protest.html
Peace,
Common Sense
When you listen to the right whine and complain about taxes you would think we are all getting a major screw job from the Obama administration. Read the signs at these gatherings of village idiots (more on that later). They don’t want to be taxed. They think they are getting ripped off. Well, read on for more detail (and as promised, I need to thank Greg for the article that supplied this information).
Thanks to the loud volume of the lying, lunatic rants by the right, about a third of the American population think the Obama administration has raised taxes (all of this according to a CBS News/New York Times poll released this month). On the 15th (tax day) thousands of those pesky tea-baggers (who are also comprised mostly of morons but I suspect they house a fair share of bigots, cowards, and liars as well) descended on Washington to protest their heavy tax burden. Around 65% of those yahoos believe the administration has raised taxes.
Are you with me so far? Good. Here is some reality. The only Obama administration policy to impact 2009 tax returns was the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (AKA the stimulus package). This basically provided a tax CUT for 98% of the tax paying citizens of this country. Let’s say that again…. Slowly… so the idiots can follow… 98% of US taxpayers got a tax cut last year. According to William Gale, co-director of the Tax Policy Center and director of the Retirement Security Project at the Brookings Institution, taxes are at their lowest levels for a period extending back 60 years. That would be 1950 (again for you slow ones). Now, we’re obviously talking percentages here, not dollars. But that’s a pretty significant revelation. The lowest level in 60 years? What the fuck are these tea-baggers protesting?
Let’s keep this moving. One third of the Recovery Act was made up of tax credits. Here’s a list…
• An increase in the Earned Income Tax Credit
• An expansion of the Child Tax Credit
• For those who work, the Making Work Pay tax credit offered $400 per individual and $800 per couple
• For those who lost their job, there was a 65 percent tax credit to help cover the cost of health care. The first $2,400 in unemployment benefits went tax-free
• Up to $2,500 under the American Opportunity Credit for students and parents paying for college tuition
• $8,000 for first-time home buyers
• A deduction of state and local taxes paid on a new car
• Up to $1,500 for home improvements to increase energy efficiency
Here’s an impact quote from the article. “Even conservative advocacy group Americans for Tax Reform, which advocates for a single, national flat tax rate, found some praise for the Recovery Act -- specifically for provisions allowing small businesses to write off a wider range of business expenses.”
Whoa! Wait a minute. A conservative group had praise for this thing? WTF?
But wait…. Other conservative economists argue that many of these tax credits are going to people who pay little or no tax to begin with. Apparently nearly half of the people who file federal income taxes pay nothing. Now, the article isn’t clear on whether or not they pay nothing, or nothing in addition to their withholding. Liberals on the other hand say these people are the ones you want to give the biggest break to. They have no option but to spend the money they saved through the credits. When they spend it, guess what gets stimulated!
Now, I love reading stuff that validates what I’ve said in the past. Of course it's the liberal take that's validating me but think about it. Trickle down doesn’t work. Conservatives will argue that if you give the rich a break, they will employ more of the poor. Bullshit. If you give the rich a break, for the most part they just get richer. If you give the less privileged a break, they spend it. When they spend it, it TRICKLES UP. I’ve said it a ton of times. But this is what conservatives don’t like. When you provide relief to the poor and the middle classes, the rich wind up paying more and/ or making less. And here is where conservative like to tell me to go pork myself because I say fuck ‘em. They can AFFORD to pay more. If you tax a guy who makes 30 grand a year at 30 percent he’s left with 20 grand. If you tax a guy who makes 300 grand the same rate he’s left with 200 grand. Taking it a step further, if you tax the 30 grand guy 5 percent (I’m exaggerating for effect) he’s left with 28,500. If you tax the 300 grand guy 50 percent he’s left with 150,000. OK, show of hands… how many of you want to be the 30 grand guy because he’s paying a lower tax rate? Yeah, I thought so.
Now, to take it further. Obama has proposed to allow the tax cuts implemented by THE MORON to expire for individuals making more than 200 grand a year and married couples making more than 250 grand. He has proposed raising the two top tax brackets from 33% and 36% to 35% and 39.6%. He wants an increase on capital gains taxes from 15% to 20% for households making more than 250 grand per year. Finally, he wants to raise the tax on dividend income from 15% to 20%, again for households making more than 250 grand. Is this Socialism? I mean come on. If you are offered 250 grand a year will you turn it down because of the additional 5% in taxes? I guess the ONLY people truly effected in an adverse way are those that made just under the 200 - 250 grand the year before the changes. Boo hoo. They'll get used to it. To quote Mr. T, “I piddy da fools”.
In closing, let’s all take a look at the protest signs so proudly displayed by the tea-baggers. Here’s a link that should provide you with an enjoyable distraction from your busy day. Now, I'm not a perfect speller and my knowledge of the detail that makes for proper English is not what I'd like it to be. I'm sure some of you pick apart these posts! But I'm working on it. And I can assure you if I was to be carrying a sign in public, I would check, recheck, and check again to insure my spelling and grammar were correct. I think I'd also try for more than a thin magic marker and shitty penmanship. Anyway, it's brilliant stuff. They should all write for Hallmark.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/galleries/teabonics_the_flawed_language_of_protest/teabonics_the_flawed_language_of_protest.html
Peace,
Common Sense
Friday, April 16, 2010
Ignorance? Not always…
A couple of things caught my eye last night and this morning that I felt were worthy of comment. The first was Lieutenant Colonel Terry Larkin, a doctor in the US Army. He is refusing deployment to Afghanistan because he does not recognize Barack Obama as the Commander in Chief. Why? Because he doesn’t believe the President was born in the USA. That’s right. Dr. Larkin is a birther. The fact that Dr. Larkin is a birther throws some dirt into my argument that birthers are morons. I’m fairly sure that even a bad doctor can’t be a moron and make it through the rigors of medical training so I need to apologize to the birthers and their movement. I guess they aren’t all morons after all. I still believe that most of them are morons. After all, this issue has been pretty much laid to rest. Hawaii has confirmed multiple times that the POTUS was in fact born there. But what about the good doctor?
I guess the answer is the birthers are a diverse group of morons and bigots. And possibly cowards. Today’s society has been very specific on what is and is not “politically correct”. Outside of the world of radical hate groups there is seldom a mention of race, gender, or religion as a reason for success or failure, competence or incompetence, qualification or lack of qualification that goes unnoticed. Statements such as “she was hired because she was a woman” or, “his failure was expected because he is black” or, “we never expected a Jew to be placed into that position” would garner howls of protest as they should. We have moved far beyond that type of reasoning within the law. But we have NOT moved beyond it in the way many of us think and act. It’s better than it was in the 60’s but we still have a long way to go.
So if Dr. Larkin is not a moron he must be a bigot or a coward. As I ponder this I find myself leaning towards coward. After all, a bigot is likely a moron. I think we HAVE evolved as a society to the point where we realize gender, race, or religion does not qualify or disqualify anyone from anything. Well, maybe there aren’t any women out there that will win a big dick contest. And I guess a Muslim won’t win “Jew of the year”. It’s also unlikely that Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson will be competing in the “Miss USA Pageant” any time soon. But anything of substance is pretty much attained by hard work and dedication (or in the case of big business, occasionally by who you know) not by gender, race, or religion. Well, a member of a “protected class” might be advanced by someone who feels the need to proclaim to the world “Look at me! I’m not a racist/homophobe/woman hater/religious persecutor”/etc. Of course, if one feels the need to proclaim it, one likely has issues around it. But one would hope that a doctor, by virtue of their training and education would be very much aware of all this. Therefore, Dr. Larkin must in fact be a coward. This is the only sound reason he would refuse deployment to Afghanistan right?
Well, maybe not. Because as I continue to ponder the issue I realize that one might not necessarily need to be a moron to be a bigot. I think it has been demonstrated that reasonably intelligent people can in fact become blind to reality and be so infused with hate that they fail to think logically. Look at the populace of Japan during WWII. These were not stupid people. This was an extremely advanced society. Look at the Republican Party. There are a ton of seemingly intelligent people there who just don’t get it.
So if you don’t need to be a moron to be a bigot, then Dr. Larkin might very well be a bigot and not a coward. One could argue the point that the birthers get less shit than the KKK so it might behoove one to align with those who feign or claim ignorance to the place of Obama’s birth rather than a hate group. Well, I guess the birthers are a hate group…. But they claim not to be.
So, point number one is that those stinky annoying birthers might not be moronic but instead they might just not like black people or be little fraidy cats….
The second thing I found myself spending time I don’t have on today is an article sent by my friend Roy (thanks Roy) that concerns the establishment of startup news organizations that are being bankrolled by conservative groups. I need help with this one. Those on the right that take issue with the “liberal press” want to go out and create news outlets that will by nature be “conservative press”. Wouldn’t you think they would want to just support “neutral” or “unbiased” press? And this made me think of my mother.
OK, by now you’re wondering just what the hell is wrong with me. How did I get to my mother (may she rest in peace). Well let me tell you…. My mother had one very nasty trait (actually, she had several, but this one seemed to be a major annoyance to me). She COULD NOT accept as fact, that which she did not want to hear. In other words, if she didn’t believe it, then it couldn’t be true. Needless to say, she was a Republican (he said, with a wry grin). So I wonder, is this a trait shared by a big chunk of the Republican Party? Is this inability to accept anything other than what you want to hear, one mark of a conservative? I think it might be! Does this indicate ignorance, bigotry, cowardice, or some combination of the three? I think it does. Why? I’m glad you asked.
Ignorance is easy. When one is too stupid to formulate your own reality, you let others do it for you. And those others are generally those that are saying what you want to hear. Not necessarily the truth mind you. But what you want to hear. And it doesn’t even have to be the primary point. It can be anything that results in your preferred reality. If you don’t want a black leader (bigot), you might be relieved to hear that Obama was not born in the USA (ignorant) because now you can fight against him with a reason that makes you look like a moron instead of a bigot! But since you don’t have the balls to state the real reason you are against him, well I guess that makes you a coward too! So what better way to lessen your feelings of inadequacy and stupidity than to start up news organizations that speak to what you want to hear? Forget the truth. We’ll “FOX” you into a stupor. After all, ignorance is bliss!
Next time we will talk more about ignorance and creating your own reality. But instead of thanking Roy I’ll be thanking Greg. See you then.
Peace,
Common Sense
I guess the answer is the birthers are a diverse group of morons and bigots. And possibly cowards. Today’s society has been very specific on what is and is not “politically correct”. Outside of the world of radical hate groups there is seldom a mention of race, gender, or religion as a reason for success or failure, competence or incompetence, qualification or lack of qualification that goes unnoticed. Statements such as “she was hired because she was a woman” or, “his failure was expected because he is black” or, “we never expected a Jew to be placed into that position” would garner howls of protest as they should. We have moved far beyond that type of reasoning within the law. But we have NOT moved beyond it in the way many of us think and act. It’s better than it was in the 60’s but we still have a long way to go.
So if Dr. Larkin is not a moron he must be a bigot or a coward. As I ponder this I find myself leaning towards coward. After all, a bigot is likely a moron. I think we HAVE evolved as a society to the point where we realize gender, race, or religion does not qualify or disqualify anyone from anything. Well, maybe there aren’t any women out there that will win a big dick contest. And I guess a Muslim won’t win “Jew of the year”. It’s also unlikely that Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson will be competing in the “Miss USA Pageant” any time soon. But anything of substance is pretty much attained by hard work and dedication (or in the case of big business, occasionally by who you know) not by gender, race, or religion. Well, a member of a “protected class” might be advanced by someone who feels the need to proclaim to the world “Look at me! I’m not a racist/homophobe/woman hater/religious persecutor”/etc. Of course, if one feels the need to proclaim it, one likely has issues around it. But one would hope that a doctor, by virtue of their training and education would be very much aware of all this. Therefore, Dr. Larkin must in fact be a coward. This is the only sound reason he would refuse deployment to Afghanistan right?
Well, maybe not. Because as I continue to ponder the issue I realize that one might not necessarily need to be a moron to be a bigot. I think it has been demonstrated that reasonably intelligent people can in fact become blind to reality and be so infused with hate that they fail to think logically. Look at the populace of Japan during WWII. These were not stupid people. This was an extremely advanced society. Look at the Republican Party. There are a ton of seemingly intelligent people there who just don’t get it.
So if you don’t need to be a moron to be a bigot, then Dr. Larkin might very well be a bigot and not a coward. One could argue the point that the birthers get less shit than the KKK so it might behoove one to align with those who feign or claim ignorance to the place of Obama’s birth rather than a hate group. Well, I guess the birthers are a hate group…. But they claim not to be.
So, point number one is that those stinky annoying birthers might not be moronic but instead they might just not like black people or be little fraidy cats….
The second thing I found myself spending time I don’t have on today is an article sent by my friend Roy (thanks Roy) that concerns the establishment of startup news organizations that are being bankrolled by conservative groups. I need help with this one. Those on the right that take issue with the “liberal press” want to go out and create news outlets that will by nature be “conservative press”. Wouldn’t you think they would want to just support “neutral” or “unbiased” press? And this made me think of my mother.
OK, by now you’re wondering just what the hell is wrong with me. How did I get to my mother (may she rest in peace). Well let me tell you…. My mother had one very nasty trait (actually, she had several, but this one seemed to be a major annoyance to me). She COULD NOT accept as fact, that which she did not want to hear. In other words, if she didn’t believe it, then it couldn’t be true. Needless to say, she was a Republican (he said, with a wry grin). So I wonder, is this a trait shared by a big chunk of the Republican Party? Is this inability to accept anything other than what you want to hear, one mark of a conservative? I think it might be! Does this indicate ignorance, bigotry, cowardice, or some combination of the three? I think it does. Why? I’m glad you asked.
Ignorance is easy. When one is too stupid to formulate your own reality, you let others do it for you. And those others are generally those that are saying what you want to hear. Not necessarily the truth mind you. But what you want to hear. And it doesn’t even have to be the primary point. It can be anything that results in your preferred reality. If you don’t want a black leader (bigot), you might be relieved to hear that Obama was not born in the USA (ignorant) because now you can fight against him with a reason that makes you look like a moron instead of a bigot! But since you don’t have the balls to state the real reason you are against him, well I guess that makes you a coward too! So what better way to lessen your feelings of inadequacy and stupidity than to start up news organizations that speak to what you want to hear? Forget the truth. We’ll “FOX” you into a stupor. After all, ignorance is bliss!
Next time we will talk more about ignorance and creating your own reality. But instead of thanking Roy I’ll be thanking Greg. See you then.
Peace,
Common Sense
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
