Dr. Forbush Thinks

The most notable thing about the current congress is the lack of confrontation with the White House. How many bills have been vetoed? Where are the late night sessions where the House leaderships works to hammer out a deal with the President so that he’ll sign the tough legislation? How many times has the Vice President been called in to break the close tie vote in the Senate? None of these things have happened, because the Congress has been a rubber stamp of the administration. But we all know what Shakespeare said, “All the world’s a stage,” and maybe that is exactly what the Republican Party has in mind.

Instead of strong leadership in the congress fighting for the American people, the congress has taken to supporting the talking money of the lobbyists. The truth here is that the Republican Party that told you back in the early 1990s that they would rid government of “special interests” has brought their own brand of special interests to Washington. Instead of groups wanting laws to keep the air and water clean, we have groups that want companies to be able to drill for oil wherever they please and not be responsible to clean up afterward. Instead of groups fighting for fair labor conditions across the board at all companies in America, we have groups of companies that want to hire cheap labor who will work 24/7 without regulation of any kind. The interests have changed, but the “special interest” groups are still calling the shots in Washington. And, the Republican Party has made their job even more efficient than the Democrats ever did.

With such an organized effort going on, there isn’t any room for conflict, or even a pothole in the road. Unfortunately for the Republican congress the lack of conflict looks like the congress is in lock step with the President. If the two branches of government are working together, then what’s the problem?

Well, the problem is that the President’s approval ratings are awfully low. The Congress’s approval ratings are awfully low. Logic would have you believe that if the approval rating are low and there is no conflict, then the government is not doing what the people would like the government to do. This makes sense to the average American. This makes sense to the Congress and the Bush administration as well.

So, maybe the brilliant political mind of Karl Rove has decided to create some theatrics in order to help the congress get reelected. After all, it doesn’t really matter what the President’s approval ratings are this year. But, it does matter what the approval ratings are for 33 members of the Senate and the entire House of Representatives. Perhaps if a few of the close races were to be energized with a little screaming of sorts, then the people would feel as if their congressman was actually fighting the good fight against the tyranny in the form of a misguided President. And, maybe the conflict could be resolved just before the election with the President changing his mind on a key issue or two. Perhaps then the Republicans could get back to screwing the American people in the name of special interests.

 
 


-----------------------------------------------------

Don't forget what Stephen Colbert said, "Reality has a well-known liberal bias."

Cross Posted @ Bring It On, tblog, Blogger and BlogSpirit

Politics

 
It seems so rare these days to hear a sane Republican talk about the things Republicans used to talk about but never acted on once they were in power. Today I heard a sane Republican who is in the Primary race for the California 11th Congressional district. This is the seat currently held by the lap dog of the administration Richard Pombo. The forum was supposed to be a debate between the Republican candidates. However, since Richard Pombo was able to acquire a huge fortune in lobbyist contributions through his connections with Jack Abramoff he didn’t need to show up for the debate, and he didn’t.

I should point out that the Republicans in California’s 11th congressional district should certainly be paying attention to this race, because of the gerrymandered district it is highly unlikely that the race could be won by a Democrat. In a sense this is the election, and November is only a formality. If you go to Richard Pombo’s web site you can see for yourself the odd nature of the shape of this district. If you know something about the San Francisco Bay area you should realize that the district subtends the coastal range of mountains which would normally be a natural divide between two unrelated areas. The district includes a large portion of the agricultural San Joaquin valley, blue collar towns of Stockton and Manteca which would normally vote Democrat, along with the bedroom communities of Tracy and Pleasanton and Morgan Hill which would be likely to lean more Republican. Richard Pombo is a far right Republican with a history of land development that can easily ignore the Democrats and environmentalists in his district. He has consistently voted against protecting any land and is active in selling National and State Park land to developers. In order to move up in the Republican power structure in Washington he has voted for lobbyist interests and against the people’s interests, including a vote against Veterans benefits and rehabilitation for Iraqi vets returning from the war. His personal interest is in putting a road through the coastal mountain range to link San Jose to the Central Valley. Of course, he fails to mention all of the land that he has purchased along his proposed route through the mountains.

In the Republican primary Richard Pombo is running against former Rep. Paul "Pete'' McCloskey, and Tom Benigno. Tom Benigno is clearly in the race for himself. This seems like a bold statement to make, but if you’d listened to the discussion you would agree with me. When asked about Richard Pombo, he tells us how corrupt he is, but when asked if he would support the Democrat or Pombo in the November election he uses the cocky politico speak of saying that won’t happen, because he is going to win the primary. Who really wants a representative in Washington who refuses to imagine that something other than his or her own plan could actually happen? Isn’t that the problem we have in Washington right now? How could this be a change?

Pete McCloskey is certainly the type of Republican that would benefit his district and Americans in general in Washington DC. He makes no bones about the difficulty of running a campaign against a well funded and well back candidate. He is honest about the uphill battle that he is fighting. When asked the difficult question about the possibility of Pombo winning the primary, he tells us that he would back the Democrat over Pombo. That is how corrupt Richard Pombo is. Hopefully Pete McClosky will get the backing and support he needs, but June 6th is not far off. Perhaps instead of money he needs media attention.

From my point of view as a moderate I can certainly support a moderate Republican that cares about the environment and our National Parks. I can certainly support a Republican candidate that wants to put ethics back into government. I can certainly support a Republican candidate who has no problem reaching out across the aisle to make this country stronger for all Americans and not just the lobbyists who have bribed Richard Pombo and the current leadership of the Republican Party.

Pete McCloskey is a sane Republican that has experience in leadership, and if you are voting in the Republican primary for the California 11th congressional district race on June 6, 2006 look for his name. You could do a lot worse.



-----------------------------------------------------





Don't forget what Stephen Colbert said, "Reality has a well-known liberal bias."


Cross Posted @ Bring It On, tblog, Blogger and BlogSpirit



Politics

I just finished the first part of reading Kevin Phillips book, “American Theocracy: The Peril and Politics of Radical Religion, Oil, and Borrowed Money in the 21stCentury.” He has divided the book into three parts, each of which deals with Oil, Religion and Finance in that order. Obviously I haven’t read the entire thing yet, so I wouldn’t be able to comment on the Religion or Financial parts of the book, but there is plenty to write about in the Oil section.

It is quite interesting to hear people say that Oil is the lifeblood of the American economy. Obviously this statement is technically true, but it is also biased at the same time. The point that this statement is missing is that energy is America’s lifeblood, but oil is the current carrier of that energy. Kevin Philips points out that coal was the lifeblood of the British economy in the 1800s and when they failed to make the switch to oil in the early twentieth century America was able to surpass the British as a world power. Well, I am not certain that the failure to make this switch was clearly the only reason, because there were also two world wars that may have had some impact, but it is clear that the British continued to play catch up from the 1940s on.

It is also very important to know when to change and grow with new technology. If we still used coal for our energy, we may still be using steam engines for transportation, heat, and heavy industry. But, oil made it possible for individuals to live in the suburbs and drive into the city to work every day. The suburbs would look at bit different today if everyone used the steam powered train everyday instead of the automobile. But, just because oil works for us today does not mean that we should be considering other means of energy for the future.

The point is not just energy, but cheap energy. Or, from an environmental concern cheap clean energy would be the main point.

The average American has no idea how they get their energy. They also have no idea how they get their food either, and the people selling food and energy like it that way. Just like the snake oil salesmen of the Old West you can’t pull a scam when people know what you are doing. But if you can make enough people believe what you tell them, then you can swindle a lot of cash and get out of Dodge before they know what’s hit them. We only have to look as far as ENRON to know that this is true. Enron was able to swindle the state of California by artificially raising the price of energy by buy up all the energy available and selling it back into the market before any money or energy actually changed hands. If the government leaders knew that Enron was able to do this they never would have let it happen, but the market was unregulated and Enron could do as it pleased without being watched.

Well, the oil industry works the same way. When oil is scarce the price goes up. If oil was the only way to get energy, then oil producers would have a monopoly on the energy market. But, coal, nuclear energy, wind, solar, hydrogen and alcohol all play a part in the energy market. But oil currently plays the biggest part in the market. Since the oil producers control so much of the market they are able to spend money to grease the wheels of government in ways that the other energy producers could only dream of greasing. In fact, the oil producers have someone from their industry at the head of the most powerful nation in the world. And Dick Cheney has used his power to protect American oil producers around the world.

One interesting thing about oil production is that not all oil wells produce oil for the same cost. New oil fields have oil at higher pressure, therefore requiring less energy to actually extract the oil from the ground. The more oil that is removed from the wells the more expensive it is to retrieve more oil from those fields. And, it turns out that Iraqi oil is some of the cheapest oil to produce in the world. No wonder that Dick Cheney was so eager to attack Iraq before 9/11/2001 when he met with American oil company executives. He was already deciding how to divvy up the Middle East oil, before Iraq or Iran was invaded. Imagine the smiles of glee when Dick Cheney proposed that American oil producers could sell the $1.00/barrel oil in Iraq for $30/barrel on the open market. But, now with oil over the $70.00/barrel mark these guys still believe that Iraq invasion was worth it. After all, it wasn’t like they had to spend their own money. Maybe a few of them did have to risk their own lives though, but they charged the government for the work.

Let me stop for a minute and look at the energy situation from the point of view of an average American who wants to drive a car at will and wants electric power when he/she flips on the switch. They want cheap energy at any cost. If the oil producers were to run people off their land and steal the oil the average American wouldn’t have a problem with it as long as it doesn’t cost more at the gas pump or when the electric bill comes due. Americans don’t seem to care how they happen to get their energy.

Now, we know that corn is grown cheaply and alcohol may be made from the corn mash. This alcohol may be burned in an alcohol-powered engine. It has been burned in Indy racecars since the 1970s. In fact, in Brazil Ford has created cars that burn both alcohol and gasoline allowing competition between two different forms of energy. When alcohol is cheaper the consumer may buy alcohol. When gasoline is cheaper the consumer may buy gasoline. Would anyone like to guess why Ford hasn’t sold these cars in the United States?

Similarly, hydrogen is another fuel that burns cleaner than any hydrocarbon, because hydrogen and oxygen burn to produce water and energy. Hydrogen may be created by using solar panels and water. Maybe hydrogen isn’t the instant answer to the energy problem, but certainly hydrogen could be one answer for the future. People could personally create hydrogen during the daylight hours with solar panels on their roofs and use the hydrogen as a type of storage reservoir for energy needed in during the evening hours. This technology has been demonstrated to work in a house set up on the Mall in Washington last year. Imagine producing hydrogen for your home and your car in the future. But what would the energy producers think of this kind of individual energy production? And, would a government with the concerns of the oil producers ahead of the average American help to get this technology jump-started?

Of course, oil producers have been able to hijack the Republican mantras of “government waste” and “no new taxes” in order to prevent people from getting this type of research off the ground. Only small scale demonstrations have any hope, as long as the oil companies have the possibility to buy the technology and develop it at the proper time. Of course this is code meant to delay the technology until the oil producers have been able to burn as much oil as possible before new energy carriers win the advantage over oil.

Kevin Phillips tells us how this didn’t work for Britain. Coal was superseded by oil as the new technology and Britain suffered by loosing status as world power. He argues that just because the United States wants to hold on to oil as its technology, which won’t prevent other countries from marching forward and displacing the United States as the world power. Imagine China or India being closed out of the oil markets and developing hydrogen as the obvious next step in energy distribution. Suddenly two fifths of the world is making their own hydrogen and developing the infrastructure for this entire industry. Who ever is first to market will certainly file patents and control this type of energy for many years securing their economic domination for the next century. The United States will continue to be tied to old energy as it runs out and Asia becomes to new world power.

Obviously when I get to the third part of the book Kevin is bound to tell me about the United States debt that China holds. It certainly seems sad that we are basically handing over the reigns of power to China and the average American has no idea that this is happening. When will the average American wake up from his electronically induced feeling of euphoria and realize that the people in charge know what they are doing and they are doing for themselves and not the common good of the average American?











-----------------------------------------------------





Don't forget what Stephen Colbert said, "Reality has a well-known liberal bias."


Cross Posted @ Bring It On, tblog, Blogger and BlogSpirit



Politics

“Bring It On,” “Wanted Dead or Alive.”

These are signature phrases of George W Bush.

And, yesterday George W Bush claimed that uttering this tough talk was the number one mistake of his presidency.

Why was this a mistake?

George W Bush says that this tough talk was misinterpreted by “people.”

What can anyone say about this?

Well, this shows us a couple of things about George W Bush. First of all, he still doesn’t get it. How was he expecting this kind of talk to be interpreted? I’m confused, when he first screamed this nonsense sane people were surprised that the leader of the free world would stoop to name calling. Sane people know that provoking a wounded animal is stupid, but George W Bush was sitting there poking the snake in the face with a stick. Sure, anyone can cut the head off a snake, but George W Bush chose to poke al Qeada in the face. Normally this would be a sign of insecurity. A bully is most likely to be a kid using force to deal with insecurity. George W Bush fit the profile like a glove.

But, he also says that this was misinterpreted by “people.” What “people” misinterpreted this? How was it misinterpreted? It seems pretty clear that the conservatives in the United States thought his reaction was brilliant. Did they misinterpret the tough talk? Or, was Bush just saying this to energize his base for his benefit, without any thought of those outside the US that might hear his words?

Maybe George W Bush means that the subject of his statements believed that he was actually encouraging them to bring it on. What a silly notion. I don’t know how anyone could come to that conclusion. I personally wonder what he really meant, because I only know one way to interpret “Bully Talk.”






-----------------------------------------------------





Don't forget what Stephen Colbert said, "Reality has a well-known liberal bias."


Cross Posted @ Bring It On, tblog, Blogger and BlogSpirit



Politics

Stephen Colbert’s performance at the White House Correspondents Dinner made a big impression in the wider community even if the actual attendees didn’t hoot and holler at the jokes. The point is that humor has a way to connect with people that the straight facts don’t. And, satire does this in an even more subtle way. Satire disarms the audience in by encouraging the audience to agree with the comedian until you realize the satire is absurd. A comedian that is able to do this over and over again truly has a remarkable gift. And, most importantly this gift allows the communication of ideas in such a way that the audience isn’t able put up it’s automatic defense walls and some of the ideas may break through.

Politics is about people learning to live with each other. When groups separate themselves from each other and build political walls between each other then communication doesn’t happen and the country is worse off. One only needs to look at countries where leaders from minority populations use fear to keep their power. The rest of the country suffers at the hands of a few. Do we truly want America to be just another minority controlled country?

If you’ve read this far I hope you agree with me that political communication is the only way to move us forward. And, hitting people with facts and figures will obviously be just like hitting them with sticks and stones; they will either ignore them or it will only make them angry, even if they are wrong. What is needed is a way to disarm those who blindly follow the Republicans and let them believe that they understand what is happening until they realize that they didn’t understand. Then they can finally come to the conclusion that, to quote Weird Al, “Everything you know is wrong.”

Stephen Colbert proved that satire works. We already knew this, but it’s still nice to know when you are right. But we should also remember that other forms of communication work as well. Parables and stories that entertain but also contain a message will certainly do the job. But, the right wing talk radio has created the paradigm that “Hollywood is wrong.” So, movies with positive liberal images of people working together to create a better world just don’t work anymore. Those John Wayne movies will never convince people of what the “True America” is supposed to be.

Art itself communicates in important ways. Paintings like Norman Rockwell give people the romanticized feeling of the way life once was in America. Conservatives like to build on these images as the positive reason to turn the clock around to 1890, 1910 or 1950. But these paintings don’t capture the real life struggle of the workers getting paid just enough to live on so that they are attached to the mining, manufacturing or farming businesses with no where else to turn. An artist that portrays the advances in labor that the Democrats have won for labor is a subtle but important political statement needed in this time of political erosion.

There are many ways to communicate effectively to the “moderates” who will be the deciders of who will govern us. Obviously, straightforward writing as I have done here is more effective in communicating to the converted. People who are undecided don’t generally care about the facts and details that I often write about. People in the middle who are undecided can be convinced of “good” points on both sides of the issue. They are also even more aware of the “bad” points on each side of the issue. In fact, the fear of selecting between to “bad” choices often keeps these people from going out to vote. But, some common sense positive reasons communicated through an alternate means of communication may be the difference in casting and not casting a vote.

All people really want is protection. People want to be protected from all those things that could possibly cause them problems. People want economic security that allows people to take risks on new ideas or businesses and risks are what make America strong. People want to be protected from disease, health problems or the economic problems associated with the loss of health. People want to be secure from the threat of crime, violence or even war. People want to know that the planet they live on today will still be inhabitable for the future generation of their family for centuries to come. And, these are the ideas that need to be communicated as the Democratic ideas to make the world a better place.







-----------------------------------------------------





Don't forget what Stephen Colbert said, "Reality has a well-known liberal bias."


Cross Posted @ Bring It On, tblog, Blogger and BlogSpirit



Politics

ABC News is reporting that the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Dennis Hastert is under investigation. What does this mean? Is the FBI taking revenge on Hasert in his defense of William Jefferson yesterday? Or, was Hastert angry yesterday, because he has something to hide?

There may be no bottom to the corruption scandal in Congress. It was really a good thing that Tom Delay and Newt Gingrich made sure that the Lobbyists on K Street couldn’t do business with the Democrats if they wanted to do business with the Republicans. The Democrats really need to thank these guys or this scandal might have looked a bit different.





-----------------------------------------------------





Don't forget what Stephen Colbert said, "Reality has a well-known liberal bias."


Cross Posted @ Bring It On, tblog, Blogger and BlogSpirit



Politics

Every once in a while it makes a lot of sense to step back and look at the big picture. Over the last few months (maybe 18 or so) a lot of things have happened on the United States political scene. Each change has come and gone and by now these events are only distant memories that the 24-hour news cycle encourages us to forget. The 24-hour news cycle is a microscope looking at every detail in the long parade of history.

So, lets go back in time to the November 2004 presidential election. We should all remember that the race was very close and the arch nemesis George W Bush defeated John Kerry by the electoral votes of the state of Ohio. This time George W Bush won the popular vote, this election was actually once again decided by the electoral votes of one state, and that particular race was very close. And, in his speech following the announcement of winning the election George W Bush claimed that he had won “political capital,” that he had planned to spend immediately. Well, as we have seen George W Bush spent all of his political capital, then he went to the bank several times where he borrowed even more political capital to spend just like all the real capital he is borrowing to wage his war in Iraq.

During the 2004 election George W Bush avoided contact with anyone that might even hint at disagreeing with him. He did this in order to insulate himself from public scrutiny. When people are shown large crowds of supporting people, the viewer tends to believe that the person subject to the praise deserves it. Without thinking, the viewer is persuaded to support the object of praise believing he is praiseworthy. Of course the truth may or may not be close to the images viewed, but the psychology certainly influences support. Of course, the opposite is also true, and the right wing smear machine managed to do the dirty work of the Bush campaign with a large number of lies and deceptions. The end result was undeserved success of the extreme right in the United States of America. But these people wanted their pound of flesh from George W Bush’s pile of political capital.

These people wanted religious laws to be made secular law. They wanted George W Bush to pass their discriminatory anti-homosexual laws prohibiting families from legally living together. They wanted abortion to be criminalized. They wanted government money to go to religious schools. They wanted government money to go to religious aid organizations. They wanted creationism to be taught in public schools. They wanted the United States to continue to fight the good fight in Babylon in the hopes of bringing on the “End Times.”

Who really knows what George W Bush was thinking. Perhaps he was afraid that he would loose his moderate supporters, or his fiscal conservative supporters, but he ignored these folk and decided that he would try to reform the Social Security Insurance system. He came up with the idea of everyone saving for their own retirement, instead of having a common insurance fund. He used the same hyperbole in describing the dire need to make this reform immediately. Fortunately the majority of Americans actually were able to figure out that everyone could already do this on their own by depositing their money into an IRA account. The only change would be to remove the protection of having a social security insurance fund. Looking back on history this seems to be the beginning of the public actually being able to see through the veils of the Bush administration secrecy.

Once the Republicans realized that the Social Security reform sham wasn’t going to happen, they turned their collective backs on George W Bush who continued to push his plan for a couple of weeks more. This feeble push was finally seen as an example of the weakness of staying the course regardless of public opinion. George W Bush spent the remaining political capital that he had with this effort, but this is America and capital can be found everywhere.

He had his chance to win his political capital back when Sandra Day O’Conner announced that she would retire. The Bush administration had been planning for this day for the last five years, so John Roberts was waiting in the wings all ready to go. His public stance on many issues was sufficiently cloaked in mystery in order to be passed by the Senate without objection. However, Republicans used their secret codes to communicate to the social conservatives that John Roberts was their buddy. He would strike down abortion once he got the opportunity.
However, before John Roberts was confirmed Chief Justice Rehnquist died, throwing a wrench in the Republican strategy. And, without a second choice standing in the queue Bush offered his secretary Harriet Miers the jobs. Like they say, “If you can’t keep it in your pants, then keep it in the family.” Or, maybe that has to do with something else. The point here is that Bush spent very little time thinking about his appointment, so he picked a person in his close circle of friends. This bad move lifted the veil of how the Bush administration operates just a bit higher and the social conservatives were given cause to pause. Finally his supporters were seeing what the Democrats had been saying all along.

Of course we all know that most people have already forgotten Harriet Miers’ name. And, the Bush crew likes when people forget their mistakes. But, after five years in office the web of lies was getting quite thick. For example, George W Bush told us how he really hated when people leaked information to the press. And, leaking the name of a CIA operative was certainly a serious offense. He even hired a guy to investigate the source of the CIA leak. And, by this time Patrick Fitzgerald, the guy hired to find the leak was zeroing in on top levels of the White House. The veil was being lifted even higher and the man behind the curtain continued to pull the levers and tell us not to look at the man behind the curtain. When Dick Cheney’s right hand man was indicted the brighter Americans knew that George W Bush knew who leaked the CIA agent’s name. Even the bright Republicans knew this and had another cause for pause.

Over in congress Tom Delay was having trouble defending himself against blatant breaking of Texas election law. His connections to convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff were coming to light as well. Then when Duke Cunningham plead guilty to his corruption charges, people began to learn that the White House wasn’t the only seat of corruption in Washington. Republicans tried to smear the Democrats with this corruption scandal, but it soon became clear that they couldn’t win that argument, because the lobbyists on K street were overwhelmingly Republican oriented, because of Tom Delay’s demand that Republicans refuse to deal with a lobbyist that also dealt with Democrats. They dug this grave, now they are on their own.

In September and October two hurricanes hit the Gulf coast. And, because the Bush administration and the Republican’s goal of smaller government aid agencies FEMA was being left to slowly bleed to death from lack of funding. By appointing a political hack to be FEMA director the agency was given less power which took away agility the agency once had. FEMA now had a director without an emergency relief experience trying to communicate with the president through the Homeland security director. As my kids would say, “That’s just messed up.” They failed miserably with Katrina, then we all witnessed the disorganized evacuation of Houston only a few weeks later. We learned a little more about how the Bush administration rewarded political hacks with government jobs regardless of their qualifications. Hence the veil was practically removed from the White House. But there are still many who refused to look in that direction. There are many who would rather close their eyes and walk into walls than to witness the corruption, deception and lies coming out of the White House and the Republicans Party.

But, I haven’t even mentioned the debacle in Iraq yet. But that isn’t necessary, because last week Karl Rove conceded that the War was a weak point. He told us that the American people don’t like President Bush because of the War in Iraq. I am sure that there are many people who don’t like the president because of the war in Iraq, but they didn’t like him long before now. They didn’t like him when he broke international law and invaded a sovereign country. They didn’t like him when he killed thousands of innocent Iraqis in his invasion. They didn’t like him when they put American soldiers in harms way without a legitimate reasoning that the action was in the self-defense of our country. But, these people felt this way three years ago. Karl Rove is finally coming around to acknowledging it.

Well, I was just trying to bring all of these facts back into focus, because with the quantity of information it is quite difficult to remember the big picture. There are many many more things that I could have mentioned, like Dick Cheney’s shooting incident, but this were more like humorous sidelights that weren’t really illuminating the fact that Dick Cheney likes to shoot lawyers or kill farm raised poultry. We also have the bravery of many people who opposed the administration and did their part to expose the hypocrisy of the Republican Party. I believe that these people did their part, and of course we all need to keep the pressure on. Every time that the opposition lets up the Republicans declare victory. This reminds me of the Black Knight in Monty Python’s Holy Grail. The Republicans seem to have adopted the “stay the course” mantra of George W Bush. The opposition could severe every limb on the body politic, and the Republicans will continue to cry out, “What are you afraid of? Come back here and fight like a man!” And, so our job is never done.








-----------------------------------------------------





Don't forget what Stephen Colbert said, "Reality has a well-known liberal bias."


Cross Posted @ Bring It On, tblog, Blogger and BlogSpirit



Politics

Polls can tell us a lot about the health of the country. So, it is quite interesting to evaluate the recent polls posted at Rasmussen, Real Clear Politics and Survey USA. I like to look at this collection of web pages to get the political temperature of the American people and maybe a bit more.

Actually, looking Real Clear Politics gives us a good overview of almost every poll taken for the last 5 years. One thing is certain about looking at this collection of polls is that Everyone agrees that George W Bush’s job approval has been going down since the day he was elected in 2000. His popularity spiked at two points in his presidency, when we were attacked on 9/11/2001 and when we attacked Iraq in March of 2003. These were rapid increases of support that increased and then slowly decayed over time. Why would the American people react in this way?

Obviously the answer is because of drug use. We all know that major traumas result in stress. After very stressful events people have been known to self medicate, or even seek professional help and prescription drugs. And, we also know that drug use can cloud ones mind. A person under the influence of drugs certainly is not responsible enough to drive a car or operate heavy machinery. In the past many locations across the country banned the sale of alcohol on election days, because many leaders agreed that alcohol could cloud the judgement of the voters.

But, alcohol isn’t the only drug capable of clouding ones mind. Many other illegal drugs could cloud ones mind. And, even many prescription drugs come with disclaimers that warn against the use of heavy machinery under the influence of these drugs. If we add to these drugs the high number of people being prescribed prosac, ritilan and other known mood changing drugs that aim to effect the illness of depression, then we must have had a huge number of people that were taking drugs immediately after 9/11/2001 and in March of 2003. This drug use obviously explains the huge surge in support for George W Bush.

Imagine the following scenario. On the morning of 9/11/2001 when the attacks were first broadcast people begin to watch TV or listen to the radio. The impact of the tragedy begins to sink in and the stress comes and then the depression comes. I know that many people felt this, because I for one felt it. Since we live in America we have many options in dealing with stress and depression. Some people have a ready supply of mood altering substances available, and they may even share with neighbors and friends. By the evening many people have self medicated themselves. Many people chose to take off several days of work. Imagine what the response of one of these drug-influenced people would be to a telephone survey asking if you believe that George W Bush is doing a good job. I am guessing that many people who were flying high would connect their happy feeling to the President’s action. Other’s might just be feeling generous and therefore share their happiness with the president and give him a pat on the back. Still others may be crying in their beer, and they can only imagine that George W Bush is having it even worse, so they give him a good job approval out of pity. But, the main point is that drugs have obviously been taken and they have influenced why the Bush job approval rating was so high after these tragedies.

But, everyone knows that drugs are not the answer. So, after some time people realize that they have lives to get back to. They realize that they need to be safe when they operate their heavy machinery. And gradually they reduce their self-medication and other drug use. When they reduce their drug use their minds gradually become clearer. But, at this point their health is still in a fragile state. People in this condition will typically avoid stress if they can. They can avoid stress by ignoring the news, be it on the TV, radio and especially the newspaper. So, the information might be there, but it isn’t being absorbed by a large number of people. And when the pollsters call these people may be generally ignorant of the real job that George W Bush was doing, but they have bits and pieces of what they believe he is doing. As more and more people gradually get off drugs and find out what George W Bush is really doing George W Bush’s job approval ratings fall.

And, now we find ourselves almost 5 years down the road from 9/11/2001. The American people seem to be kicking their drug habit and we can see this evidenced by the polls. After all, what sober person could possibly give George W Bush a “strongly approve” job evaluation? But, if we look at the Rasmussen poll, which keeps track of these things on a daily basis we see that there are still 15% of the American people surveyed that give this response. My guess would be that these 15% of the American people need serious help. They really need to break their drug addiction.

So, the solution is to set up more drug addiction clinics. But where should we set up these much-needed clinics? Well, fortunately we may use the Survey USA poll to answer this question. The Survey USA poll gives us the job approval rating of George W Bush for all of the 50 states in the United States of America. From this poll we see that only three states in the union give the president a positive approval rating. They are Idaho, Utah and Wyoming. And, now it becomes clear what is happening. It turns out that these states have very few drug rehabilitation clinics. And, with out this much needed help many people living in these states will go for years addicted to drugs, and believing that the president is doing a very good job.

But, on the much-needed positive note we certainly can all agree that national drug use is declining at a very good rate.






-----------------------------------------------------





Don't forget what Stephen Colbert said, "Reality has a well-known liberal bias."


Cross Posted @ Bring It On, tblog, Blogger and BlogSpirit



Politics, Polls, Drugs, Drug Use, Drug Addiction

Injustice in Paradise?

How can the known violation of Human Rights in the United States of America go on for more than ten years without being addressed by the law?

Maybe it is because the abuse sounded so outrageous that nobody believed that it could be true. Maybe it was because politics was against them. Maybe it was because this injustice happened in an area of the United States that falls into a special category requiring special laws that are full of exceptions to human rights and the Bill of Rights that the rest of us take for granted.

The politics of this obscenity is fading away in the Jack Abramoff and Tom Delay scandals and people are finally willing to tell the truth without fear. The awful truth has come to the mainstream in Ms. Magazine this month.

If you don’t know what I am talking about already, then read carefully what I am about to tell you. Rebecca Clarren of Ms. Magazine has written an investigative story about the abuse of Human Rights occurring in Saipan, one of the Northern Mariana Islands. Most Americans have no idea where this island is, let alone that it belongs to the United States of America. But, it isn’t a state, but a territory. And because of it’s special status the normal federal laws don’t apply to this place. It is like the special status of Guantanamo Bay Cuba that allows the twisted special laws to enable the CIA to torture people without fear of prosecution.

In the Northern Mariana Islands federal minimum wages do not apply. In the Northern Mariana Islands federal immigration laws do not apply. In the Northern Mariana Islands federal OSHA standards do not apply. And, Tom Delay has said, that Saipan was a model of an economic miracle. Obviously these people have a different idea of what an economic miracle is. This economic view of the world has everything to do with the vision that the Republican Party has for our country.

In Saipan labor is cheap. Human Resources are shipped in like the old slave trading days. But, these people are not slaves, because technically they are being paid. But like the sharecroppers of over a hundred years ago these people are not free until they pay off their debt, which is prolonged as long as possible. And when these people have paid off their debt they are free to go, but they can never leave. They need to double their labor just to be able to afford the trip home. And, if they don’t bring any money to their Chinese families when they do go home they will suffer the embarrassment of a failed daughter. The constant import of cheap labor keeps wages low, the ideal of the current Republican leadership. And, the only plentiful jobs on the island are in these sweatshops or prostitution. Isn’t it wonderful that these leaders in the Republican Party view prostitution as a legitimate job for a retired garment worker? But, the Republican Party has always been in favor of cheap labor in mainstream America as well. Why else does George W Bush want to turn the current illegal immigrants into guest workers? To keep labor cheap, of course!

Cheap labor keeps the corporations making a profit, and that’s why companies have been sending their manufacturing jobs to countries with cheap labor. However, when products are made in Saipan, these products may bare the “Made in the USA” tag, which means that patriotic Americans will pay more for these items. It is just another form of deception, which is so popular with the Republican Party.

But keeping the laws on this tiny island free from scrutiny was where Jack Abramoff and Tom Delay played the biggest role. These corrupt politicians were able to deflect more than twenty laws passed by the Senate that tried to reform the laws on this island. Jack Abramoff paid key congressmen with “free” trips to Saipan for family vacations on this tropical paradise. These congressmen were able to vote down in committee all of the more than twenty reform laws passed by the Senate. And, if one were to slip by, Tom Delay would have been able to use his influence to prevent scheduling a full House vote on it. Some of these reform laws were passed unanimously by the Senate, which demonstrates the degree that Tom Delay was able to control the legislature.
The sad thing is that in 1998, a religious group calling themselves the Religious Freedom Coalition of the Southeast had written about this. But, their efforts were silenced.

How could this happen in the United States of America? I’m guessing it has a lot to do with money. Money talks and that’s how the laws in Saipan were protected from changes.

The good news is that many of these companies are taking their business elsewhere. It isn’t because the United States passed any laws to stop the abuse. Instead it is a result of the GATT treaty, which does away with tariffs on products from other countries. Companies are moving manufacturing jobs off Saipan, because even though labor is cheap, it is even cheaper in China and India. But, the people on Saipan are already there and they aren’t going anywhere, which means that the number of prostitutes on the island is increasing. But, now that Tom Delay isn’t in the congress anymore there is hope at the end of the tunnel once again.







-----------------------------------------------------





Don't forget what Stephen Colbert said, "Reality has a well-known liberal bias."


Cross Posted @ Bring It On, tblog, Blogger and BlogSpirit



Politics

In the 1960s the progressive movement that changed the world was often accused of looking at the world through “rose-colored glasses.” This was a boon for the tinted glasses industry, because rose colored glasses actually became a short lived fashion trend. But, after almost 40 years looking at the 1960s through the rear view mirror, it seems that many of the optimists of the 1960s were wrong in assuming that things could be changed as permanently as they had hoped. The opponents of the many social reforms of the 1960s have regrouped and reasserted their strength through the conservative religious groups. Similarly the wealthy conservatives have been able to ride the wave of the social conservatives to write new laws to protect their wealth. The recent extension of the tax cuts on dividends shows that their power hasn’t waned.

The truth is that the rose-colored glasses are now on the faces of the supporters of the Republicans and the conservative movement. These people who are wearing these glasses continue to support the Republican agenda and the Bush administration, regardless of the truth that has been pouring out over the last three or four years. And, over these last three or four years the Republicans who were wearing those rose-colored glasses were willing to only see the world in those shades of pink and red.

For example, the deception used to maintain support of the American people during the build up to the War in Iraq was classic manipulation. The supporters of the Bush administration and the Republican leadership donned their rose-colored glasses and accepted the version of the need for war fed to them by the conservatives planted in the media. When the bias in the Fox News version of the war became apparent, these supporters continued to wear their trusty rose-colored glasses and continued to believe what they were told. These glasses either filtered out the ability of the wearer to watch other networks, or believe what they said. Journalists like Judy Miller continued to pound the “facts” that the Bush administration fed her, without checking into the truth of what she was told. And, those wearing these special glasses used her biased writing to support their rose-colored view of the world.

The Bush administration told us about weapons of mass destruction (WMD), which was a clever way to group chemical, biological and nuclear weapons together. In this way the administration was able to warn us of the dangers of WMD, because “…the smoking gun could be a mushroom cloud.” This statement about WMDs clearly referred to the nuclear component of this group. In logic we would ask the question: “If WMDs include chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, and we know that there are WMDs in Iraq, then do we know that there are nuclear weapons in Iraq?” Obviously, it is clear that we do not know that, but the American people don’t do so well on logic tests. So, the Bush administration was able to use fear by grouping these three types of weapons together, and distorting the logic. The Bush administration was fairly confident that Iraq had chemical weapons, because the US sold them to Saddam Hussein and he used them in the Iraq-Iran war. The Bush administration used the following logic to gain support for the war they already decided to enter based on the Downing Street memos. They told us to fear WMDs, because WMDs contain nuclear weapons which are really bad. They told us that they knew that Iraq had WMDs, but they didn’t mention that they were sure about this because they knew they had chemical weapons. And, the Republicans wearing the rose-colored glasses never questioned this flawed logic.

This strategy was so successful that the Bush administration thought that they could use this same logic again. This time they decided to use it on the immigration issue. In George W Bush’s speech on Monday night he told us that amnesty for illegal immigrants was bad. In this way he hoped to keep the support of the xenophobic conservatives who make up 20% of the Republican Party. The common understanding of amnesty is forgiveness for breaking a law. So, the Bush administration is using the twisting of logic once again in order to keep these conservatives on his side without attacking 12 million illegal immigrants living in our country. The reason he doesn’t want to enforce the law, is not because deporting 12 million people from the US would break up families. No, Bush does not want to deport 12 million people from the US because this would drive wages up for the types of work that these people do, namely agriculture, meat packing, garment sewing and even manufacturing. This might sound good for the US economy, but the truth is that a sudden change like this would cause an unknown economic effect. And, fiscal conservatives don’t like sudden economic changes of any type, because it means increased risk.

In the long run, setting wages to a reasonable level would reflect the true cost of these products and even if food and clothing will go up in price so will wages until equilibrium is found once again.

So, George W Bush has decided that changing the status of illegal immigrants from illegal to guest worker will solve the opposition to “amnesty” issue. But, since amnesty does not really depend on the status of a person, unless the status changes from illegal to legal. And, changing a person status from illegal to guest worker does actually change their status from illegal to legal. So, this really is forgiveness to a person who broke the law, which by definition is amnesty. George W Bush is just trying to avoid the use of the word amnesty by granting amnesty under another name. This is typical George W Bush (or should we say Karl Rove) deception, just on another issue. Whatever your stance on the immigration issue one must admit that George W Bush is spinning another yarn once again. And, since the American people aren’t that great with logic they might not see this, especially if they have their rose-colored glasses on.

The good news is that some conservatives from the xenophobic 20% of the Republican Party have seen through George W Bush’s redefinition of amnesty. Now, the truth should be sought and the problem should be dealt with honestly, but honesty isn’t something that George W Bush is good at. But, maybe some good could come out of this issue. If the xenophobes in the Republican Party realize that George W Bush is pulling this logic trick on them because they took off their rose-colored glasses, then maybe they will look around at the other George W Bush deceptions while they have those glasses off. And, once they begin to realize that the “amnesty” redefinition isn’t the first and only deception they just might begin to be honest about the other issues that they had once supported.

Or, maybe not, maybe I am just looking at the mess we are in here in America through my own rose-colored glasses, hoping against the odds that we will be able to correct the damage that this administration has done.






-----------------------------------------------------





Don't forget what Stephen Colbert said, "Reality has a well-known liberal bias."


Cross Posted @ Bring It On, tblog, Blogger and BlogSpirit



Politics