There has been a lot said about the enthusiasm and passion of the Tea Party Movement. It has been stoked as the “people’s movement” consisting of conservatives, democrats and independents. All of whom are acting out of nothing else but “genuine” concern for the country and its direction. However, when you examine what has been pushed by this movement, you can not help but wonder how any reasonable person could be taken by such a facetious claim of patriotism and counterfeit love of individual freedom.
The Tea Party movement has been suspect from the start. Supposedly, its moniker is “Taxed Enough Already”. Of course when you examine the data, federal taxes on individuals have been the lowest in more than 50 years since 2009. This is thanks to both Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama. So this can not be the reason that the Tea Party was founded. If you look back at pre-Tea Partyism, there were many rallies with people showing up with guns, trying to get a reaction out of the newly elected President Obama.
This was unprecedented, even during former avid gun-control administrations. When he didn’t bite, then this so-called “grassroots” movement had to change course to something that could gather traction and build up steam. Then the target became TARP which had been signed by former President Bush and executed by President Obama. It then stretched to Obama’s stimulus package which, by the way, included tax cuts.
Then the focus was expanded to convincing the populace that the Affordable Healthcare Act (you may it know as Obamacare) was going to triple the deficit.
However, if the truth be told, this was not the case.
Furthermore, the national debt within the last 50 years has been increased the most dramatically under 2 presidents, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. Guess what else these two have in common? They both were avid tax cutters although Reagan raised taxes at some point. President Obama, by embracing the lunacy of the tax cut doctrine, may also be added as the third President should he continue to so readily acquiesce to Republican demands.
Another amazing feat that has been successfully merged with this mass hypocrisy is the bait and switch that has been done with the narrative. How is it that fiscal responsibility and job creation morphed into social conservative activism?
There is no moral difference between evangelicals, the muslim brotherhood and the Taliban. When you seek to subvert the freewill of man in order to subject him to some religious ideology, you are not an advocate of freedom. You are an adversary of it. Religious morals are based on changes of the heart and mind and not changing of laws. Moreover, by adopting such positions, you are not a “strict constitutionalist”. You are an obstructionist to the constitution.
There is a reason why there is a separation of church and state. There is a reason why the founders put in the constitution that “. . . no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any Office or public trust under the United States.” You can find this in article 6 of the Constitution.
The founding fathers knew that you did not have to be religious in order to treat your neighbor like you would want to be treated. Progressives and liberals do not fight for abortion rights or gay rights because they are immoral secularists but because they realize that in being true to the founding fathers they must not subject every other citizen to one’s own religious convictions.
I find it ironic that social conservatives will tell you that they are against “Obamacare” because they don’t want government to get between you and your doctor. Yet, they advocate the government getting between you and your doctor if he performs abortions. They would also have government come between you and your marriage to a consenting adult, should you be of the same sex.
They claim the government puts too many regulations on businesses such as gun retailers and other industries but yet they will pass stringent regulations on abortion clinics. They advocate the government mandating women to have a child once they become pregnant but are staunchly against the government providing any health care for that mother and child. Moreover, they would also eliminate the guarantee of the child getting a decent education if it were possible. HYPOCRISY!
When you inquire as to why this is the case, they will tell you that the free market would fix resolve such inequalities of care. Now this is blind and futile faith because over 250 years, the “free market” has not, by itself, produced affordable healthcare.
How is it that so-called “Christian conservatives” care more about big business than they do about the average everyday American? Why would they seek to regulate the personal lives and choices of a free people but seek to deregulate commerce even when it is harmful to the general welfare of the average American? Perhaps the next time they ask you, “What would Jesus do”, you should acknowledge that they honestly don’t have a clue and give them an answer.
Follow @WyncThinks
Monday, June 27, 2011
Friday, June 24, 2011
Corporatists, America's Aristocracy
America is proof that literacy does not translate into having an informed electorate. America is also proof that great oratory skills and a shrewd marketing strategy are value effective commodities in any society. It is not what you say but how you say it and how long you say it that makes it believable and accepted. As a result, on the whole, we are only familiar with what is reported and repeated.
Thomas Jefferson once stated, "Merchants have no country. The mere spot they stand on does not constitute so strong an attachment as that from which they draw their gains."
How many Americans are familiar with the terms "plutonomy" and "plutocracy"? I will venture to say that very few have ever heard of these two words. I will not define these terms for you. Those who are seekers of truth will look them up so that they will be informed but most of you won't.
Yet these terms are relevant to what is going on in both our economy and government. When you look at where our economy has gone from over the course of the last 20 years, there is no doubt that we are on a plutonomy fast track.
When you take into account Supreme Court decisions that have allowed for corporations to spend endless amounts of money on elections and the resulting policies, there is little doubt that we are relinquishing our democracy to an ever increasing plutocracy. This assertion can be further solidified by the national push to dramatically decrease regulatory statutes, to reduce environmental standards and to strip unions of their power.
America's economy is limping along because although corporations are enjoying huge profits, the vibrancy of the middle class is nearly non-existent. Almost any economist will tell you that when the economy is stimulated and powered by the middle and lower class, it will be less volatile. This is the case because these two classes tend to put their money back into the economy.
However, when the economy is mainly sustained by the wealthiest class, the economy is always subjected to volatility by a significantly higher margin. When the wealthiest class is the controlling engine of the economy, it allows for the wealthiest among us to hold sway on public policy which amounts to plutocratic leverage on the government.
We are seeing this now being played out under the guise of deficit reduction and job creation. The only plans that are touted by the Republican Party and negotiated by the President and Democrats are ones that will benefit corporations at the expense of the average American. Democrats, who seem to have also bought into the corporatist ideology, have done very little to combat the trend that will further devastate the economy and corrupt the political system for years and decades to come.
When we have media and political operatives talking about how billionaires such as the Koch Brothers, Rupert Murdoch and George Soros are supposedly staging the narrative that will be consumed by the average American, politically we have a problem. When the news media goes from reporting news to spinning narratives to influence political debates and elections, we have a problem in America. When people such as Roger Ailes, the President of one of the most influential so-called news network, are influential advisors to politicians,we have a problem. It is called mass marketing of an agenda, better known as propaganda.
There is a certain irony that exists with the simultaneous rise of the so-called "grassroots" Tea Party and the subsequent massive push for deregulation, suspension of government services, cutting government spending by only stripping those entitlements that benefit the vulnerable and refusal to pursue any revenue enhancements all in the name of decreasing deficit spending.
We have heard politicians enthusiastically advocate putting tens of thousands of federal employees out of work because ". . . Washington has a spending problem." As the economy trudges along, look for increased pressure on privatization of services and a push to either decrease or eliminate the minimum wage. It will be touted as a way to allow the free market to work better.
Meanwhile, corporations are getting subsidies which amounts to corporate welfare, while the average citizen is told to tough it out and make "painful" concessions. Did not the constitution in its Preamble state that the government was supposed to ". . . insure domestic tranquility . . . provide for the common defense . . . promote the general welfare"? Does this include telling the American citizen that when it comes to health care, jobs and environmental safety, you need to fend for yourself while the government is continuing to provide corporate welfare for corporations who have enjoyed substantial and, at times, record setting profits?
Our economy will never get back on solid footing until the middle class become vibrant again. If we continue to travel down the road of plutonomy economics and allow ourselves to be governed like a plutocracy, we will see American society reduced to serfdom with the ruling class being corporations and corporatists.
Follow @WyncThinks
Thomas Jefferson once stated, "Merchants have no country. The mere spot they stand on does not constitute so strong an attachment as that from which they draw their gains."
How many Americans are familiar with the terms "plutonomy" and "plutocracy"? I will venture to say that very few have ever heard of these two words. I will not define these terms for you. Those who are seekers of truth will look them up so that they will be informed but most of you won't.
Yet these terms are relevant to what is going on in both our economy and government. When you look at where our economy has gone from over the course of the last 20 years, there is no doubt that we are on a plutonomy fast track.
When you take into account Supreme Court decisions that have allowed for corporations to spend endless amounts of money on elections and the resulting policies, there is little doubt that we are relinquishing our democracy to an ever increasing plutocracy. This assertion can be further solidified by the national push to dramatically decrease regulatory statutes, to reduce environmental standards and to strip unions of their power.
America's economy is limping along because although corporations are enjoying huge profits, the vibrancy of the middle class is nearly non-existent. Almost any economist will tell you that when the economy is stimulated and powered by the middle and lower class, it will be less volatile. This is the case because these two classes tend to put their money back into the economy.
However, when the economy is mainly sustained by the wealthiest class, the economy is always subjected to volatility by a significantly higher margin. When the wealthiest class is the controlling engine of the economy, it allows for the wealthiest among us to hold sway on public policy which amounts to plutocratic leverage on the government.
We are seeing this now being played out under the guise of deficit reduction and job creation. The only plans that are touted by the Republican Party and negotiated by the President and Democrats are ones that will benefit corporations at the expense of the average American. Democrats, who seem to have also bought into the corporatist ideology, have done very little to combat the trend that will further devastate the economy and corrupt the political system for years and decades to come.
When we have media and political operatives talking about how billionaires such as the Koch Brothers, Rupert Murdoch and George Soros are supposedly staging the narrative that will be consumed by the average American, politically we have a problem. When the news media goes from reporting news to spinning narratives to influence political debates and elections, we have a problem in America. When people such as Roger Ailes, the President of one of the most influential so-called news network, are influential advisors to politicians,we have a problem. It is called mass marketing of an agenda, better known as propaganda.
There is a certain irony that exists with the simultaneous rise of the so-called "grassroots" Tea Party and the subsequent massive push for deregulation, suspension of government services, cutting government spending by only stripping those entitlements that benefit the vulnerable and refusal to pursue any revenue enhancements all in the name of decreasing deficit spending.
We have heard politicians enthusiastically advocate putting tens of thousands of federal employees out of work because ". . . Washington has a spending problem." As the economy trudges along, look for increased pressure on privatization of services and a push to either decrease or eliminate the minimum wage. It will be touted as a way to allow the free market to work better.
Meanwhile, corporations are getting subsidies which amounts to corporate welfare, while the average citizen is told to tough it out and make "painful" concessions. Did not the constitution in its Preamble state that the government was supposed to ". . . insure domestic tranquility . . . provide for the common defense . . . promote the general welfare"? Does this include telling the American citizen that when it comes to health care, jobs and environmental safety, you need to fend for yourself while the government is continuing to provide corporate welfare for corporations who have enjoyed substantial and, at times, record setting profits?
Our economy will never get back on solid footing until the middle class become vibrant again. If we continue to travel down the road of plutonomy economics and allow ourselves to be governed like a plutocracy, we will see American society reduced to serfdom with the ruling class being corporations and corporatists.
Follow @WyncThinks
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Weinergate is a Scandal of Irrelevance
I guess New York congressmen are the flavor of the year. I honestly didn't want to weigh in on any of this nonsense. However, after talking to my mom who just so happens to live in Missouri, I thought maybe I should. This was decided after, while in conversation, she broached the subject by asking, "What do you think about the Rep. Weiner issue".
My response, "From what I know of him regarding how he handled the 911 first responder's legislation, I think he is alright. However, as far as his personal issues, that is between him, his family and his district so long as he hasn't broken the law". She replied, "Are you going to write about that?"
Wow! My mother, whose older sister lives in New York, is wondering if I am going to write about Congressman Weiner. Well, being the good son that I try to be on occasion, here we go. I must say that I am not big on inconsequential personality flaws of politicians because I prefer to stick to where one stands on policy.
I remember back during the Rep. Chris Lee manufactured scandal, when he sent a topless photo to some woman he met on Craigslist. One of my colleagues remarked about how "disgusting and reprehensible" it was. I stated then that it was a manufactured scandal. He went into utter shock because he couldn't understand how I could not believe that the photo was of Congressman Lee.
That is when I promptly explained that whether the picture was of him or not was irrelevant to me unless it was proof of illegal activity. I also stated that unless the people of his district disapproved of his politics, he should not resign. However, he did resign. When discussing the Rep. Weiner scandal with my mother, the answer was still the same. Unless it is alleged that a crime was committed, it is a matter of the people of his district and his family. Anyone asking for him to resign is doing it out of political expediency and not out of concern for his family, district or the American people.
Just in case you didn't know, the United States has been in a heavily heated fight for control of government and the hearts of the American people for the last 20 years. Propagandist and political operatives are always accusing the "mainstream" media of asking "gotcha questions". But what should be more alarming and disconcerting to the populace is "gotcha politics". This is the tactic used to dethrone or unseat someone, not on the basis of public policy or illegalities but on the basis of personal faults unrelated to public life.
In "gotcha politics", people do not seek to debate your position but rather to find chinks anywhere in your armor to provide political fodder and advantage. Most people didn't know what Rep. Lee's policy stances were. Most people don't know what Rep. Weiner's policy stances are. The only thing that people do know is that there are some photos meant for private use that were leaked to the public. There are very few people who do not have compromising photos in their private stash or in the possession of individuals they trust, that would not be embarrassing if they were made public.
Rep Weiner is not being coerced to resign strictly because of these photos and what amounts to cybersex. He is being pressed by political and media operatives on the right , as a way of pressing the political advantage and by those on the left, in an effort to fend off guilt by association in public opinion. However, unless criminal charges are sought, his actions are only relevant to his family and the electorate of the ninth district and irrelevant in regards to the national narrative on public policy.
Follow @WyncThinks
My response, "From what I know of him regarding how he handled the 911 first responder's legislation, I think he is alright. However, as far as his personal issues, that is between him, his family and his district so long as he hasn't broken the law". She replied, "Are you going to write about that?"
Wow! My mother, whose older sister lives in New York, is wondering if I am going to write about Congressman Weiner. Well, being the good son that I try to be on occasion, here we go. I must say that I am not big on inconsequential personality flaws of politicians because I prefer to stick to where one stands on policy.
I remember back during the Rep. Chris Lee manufactured scandal, when he sent a topless photo to some woman he met on Craigslist. One of my colleagues remarked about how "disgusting and reprehensible" it was. I stated then that it was a manufactured scandal. He went into utter shock because he couldn't understand how I could not believe that the photo was of Congressman Lee.
That is when I promptly explained that whether the picture was of him or not was irrelevant to me unless it was proof of illegal activity. I also stated that unless the people of his district disapproved of his politics, he should not resign. However, he did resign. When discussing the Rep. Weiner scandal with my mother, the answer was still the same. Unless it is alleged that a crime was committed, it is a matter of the people of his district and his family. Anyone asking for him to resign is doing it out of political expediency and not out of concern for his family, district or the American people.
Just in case you didn't know, the United States has been in a heavily heated fight for control of government and the hearts of the American people for the last 20 years. Propagandist and political operatives are always accusing the "mainstream" media of asking "gotcha questions". But what should be more alarming and disconcerting to the populace is "gotcha politics". This is the tactic used to dethrone or unseat someone, not on the basis of public policy or illegalities but on the basis of personal faults unrelated to public life.
In "gotcha politics", people do not seek to debate your position but rather to find chinks anywhere in your armor to provide political fodder and advantage. Most people didn't know what Rep. Lee's policy stances were. Most people don't know what Rep. Weiner's policy stances are. The only thing that people do know is that there are some photos meant for private use that were leaked to the public. There are very few people who do not have compromising photos in their private stash or in the possession of individuals they trust, that would not be embarrassing if they were made public.
Rep Weiner is not being coerced to resign strictly because of these photos and what amounts to cybersex. He is being pressed by political and media operatives on the right , as a way of pressing the political advantage and by those on the left, in an effort to fend off guilt by association in public opinion. However, unless criminal charges are sought, his actions are only relevant to his family and the electorate of the ninth district and irrelevant in regards to the national narrative on public policy.
Follow @WyncThinks
Monday, June 13, 2011
A Home Gym For Less Than $100
As we seek to combat obesity, retain our youthful vigor, and look good on a daily basis, we often invest our money in gym memberships and costly equipment in order to ensure a proper and challenging workout. Gym memberships can range anywhere from $300-$1000 a year depending on prestige and what is offered. If it is hard to find the time to get to the gym, some may prefer home gyms.
Those who elect to build there own home gym will usually spend somewhere in the same range price of a full year membership. However, this takes up a lot of space in the home and can draw the ire of a less fitness enthusiastic spouse, significant other or roommate. Should you have to sacrifice your fitness under the auspices of keeping the peace? Of course the answer is "no".
Your commitment to fitness is vital to leading a less stressful and more healthy life. Instead of sacrificing, apply a very workable solution that will be economical, space efficient and effective. You can have a home gym that provides great workout options, takes up virtually little to no space and cost less than a $100! You need only purchase 3 items: Pull-up bar, stability ball, and a pair of dumb bells.
The pull-up bar is often overlooked on the value it offers the body in the way of fitness. With both pull-ups and chin-up, you have a compound exercise that works biceps, forearms and upper back muscles. By hanging from the bar and doing knee and leg lifts, you can also work the abdominals. Your body provides the necessary resistance. You can purchase pull-up bars (ones that adjust to doorways) for as little as $20.
The stability or fitness ball is yet another fitness tool which multi-faceted use can prove extensively valuable to an at home work out. With many of the exercises that involve the stability ball, your core muscles are in constant use. This is even the case when doing bench presses or flies; your abdominals are working to keep you stable while you are pressing. You can procure a stability ball starting at around $10 dependent upon where you purchase it.
Last but not least are dumb bells. You should choose wisely when purchasing dumb bells. Find a weight that will provide reasonable resistance and can be utilized in a variety of exercises. Dumb bells provide for versatility in your workouts and can be used to both strengthen and tone. A few examples are, military press, lunges, curls, tricep extensions, goblet squats, bench press and back rows. The possibilities are endless, especially when used in combination with the pull-up bar, stability ball and calisthenics. A pair of 20 pound dumbbells will cost approximately $35. However, the price you will spend will be dependent on the amount of weight you want.
A disciplined steadfast utilization of these three items with the incorporation of cardio such as running, walking, biking, swimming, etc., will render more than satisfactory results as it relates to over all physical fitness.
Follow @WyncThinks
Those who elect to build there own home gym will usually spend somewhere in the same range price of a full year membership. However, this takes up a lot of space in the home and can draw the ire of a less fitness enthusiastic spouse, significant other or roommate. Should you have to sacrifice your fitness under the auspices of keeping the peace? Of course the answer is "no".
Your commitment to fitness is vital to leading a less stressful and more healthy life. Instead of sacrificing, apply a very workable solution that will be economical, space efficient and effective. You can have a home gym that provides great workout options, takes up virtually little to no space and cost less than a $100! You need only purchase 3 items: Pull-up bar, stability ball, and a pair of dumb bells.
The pull-up bar is often overlooked on the value it offers the body in the way of fitness. With both pull-ups and chin-up, you have a compound exercise that works biceps, forearms and upper back muscles. By hanging from the bar and doing knee and leg lifts, you can also work the abdominals. Your body provides the necessary resistance. You can purchase pull-up bars (ones that adjust to doorways) for as little as $20.
The stability or fitness ball is yet another fitness tool which multi-faceted use can prove extensively valuable to an at home work out. With many of the exercises that involve the stability ball, your core muscles are in constant use. This is even the case when doing bench presses or flies; your abdominals are working to keep you stable while you are pressing. You can procure a stability ball starting at around $10 dependent upon where you purchase it.
Last but not least are dumb bells. You should choose wisely when purchasing dumb bells. Find a weight that will provide reasonable resistance and can be utilized in a variety of exercises. Dumb bells provide for versatility in your workouts and can be used to both strengthen and tone. A few examples are, military press, lunges, curls, tricep extensions, goblet squats, bench press and back rows. The possibilities are endless, especially when used in combination with the pull-up bar, stability ball and calisthenics. A pair of 20 pound dumbbells will cost approximately $35. However, the price you will spend will be dependent on the amount of weight you want.
A disciplined steadfast utilization of these three items with the incorporation of cardio such as running, walking, biking, swimming, etc., will render more than satisfactory results as it relates to over all physical fitness.
Follow @WyncThinks
Deficit Debate Is About Political Posturing, Not Practical Solutions
In October 2010, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell stated "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." Then, less than a month later, the House was convincingly won by the Republicans; and Democrats in the Senate saw their overwhelming majority diminish. Armed with a so-called "mandate", the Republicans immediately began to press the advantage.
They fought all measures that would allow any of the Bush tax cuts to expire. Anything that the Republicans could oppose without taking too much political heat, they vehemently opposed. They changed the focus from job creation to deficit reduction. Since then, to their credit, they have functionally owned the news cycle narrative and set the agenda while the President has played defense and assumed the role of Reactionary in Chief. Meanwhile the Democrats have been frustrated and eerily silent.
However, this is all a sham that bodes more toward assuming power than providing assistance to the average American and spurring the economy. Unemployment is reported at being over 9% and by most estimations, in reality it is actually well over 10%. Instead of coming up with viable solutions to put people back to work, Washington is fiddling while Rome burns!
Furthermore, Washington is looking to increase unemployment. It is not a question of "if" but a matter of how much. To drive this fact home, you have congressmen like Rep. Broun of Georgia saying that government workers need to find a "real job". When you talk about cutting government spending, you are talking about cutting jobs which, in turn, increases the unemployment rate. Speaker Boehner keeps insisting that we ". . . don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem" and that raising taxes is a "nonstarter". Which further let's us know that the deficit debate is neither about job creation nor fiscal responsibility.
If Washington was serious, you would hear pragmatic debates that put everything on the table. For example, if jobs need to be created, how about lowering the corporate tax to between 15-17%? Let the corporations know that if they bring jobs to America they will not have to start paying corporate taxes for the first five years. Then close every loophole that rewards companies that take jobs overseas and raise the tariffs. This would lure the companies that have fled to Ireland, China, India and Singapore due to the fact that we have the highest corporate tax in the world. In addition, it would encourage foreign corporations to build in America. This would put people back to work and broaden the tax base.
Allow the Bush tax cuts to expire and reform the tax code. Limit tax deductions and credits; and these should only apply to taxes paid. The government is hemorrhaging revenue every year with people receiving end of the year tax bonuses as refunds. If you owe me $20 and pay me $30, when I give back $10 that is a refund. Even if I took into account something notable that you did and cancelled the debt, your refund will be $30.
However, if you owe me $20, pay me $30 and I give you a check back for $375, only $30 is a refund. The rest is a bonus. This practice needs to stop if we take fiscal responsibility serious. Individuals and corporations are getting away with billions of dollars that could go toward cutting the deficit. If we curtailed this practice, we would be well on our way to cutting the deficit significantly.
For the likes of Rep. Broun, I have a novel ideal. Since it looks like we want to cut entitlement programs on the federal level, how about this? Since each Congressman and each Senator technically represent a state, how about taking every one of them off of the Federal payroll with the exception of the Speaker of the House and the president pro tempore. They should get paid by the people of their state. This would free up more revenue to help cut the deficit.
Now, of course you will never hear any of this in Washington because Washington is not serious. All you will hear is the deficit debate getting tossed around like the political football it is. The same goes for immigration reform and any other topic that can serve as a reliable "go to when the chips are down" issue when the subject needs to be changed. Remember "jobs, jobs, jobs"?
Follow @WyncThinks
They fought all measures that would allow any of the Bush tax cuts to expire. Anything that the Republicans could oppose without taking too much political heat, they vehemently opposed. They changed the focus from job creation to deficit reduction. Since then, to their credit, they have functionally owned the news cycle narrative and set the agenda while the President has played defense and assumed the role of Reactionary in Chief. Meanwhile the Democrats have been frustrated and eerily silent.
However, this is all a sham that bodes more toward assuming power than providing assistance to the average American and spurring the economy. Unemployment is reported at being over 9% and by most estimations, in reality it is actually well over 10%. Instead of coming up with viable solutions to put people back to work, Washington is fiddling while Rome burns!
Furthermore, Washington is looking to increase unemployment. It is not a question of "if" but a matter of how much. To drive this fact home, you have congressmen like Rep. Broun of Georgia saying that government workers need to find a "real job". When you talk about cutting government spending, you are talking about cutting jobs which, in turn, increases the unemployment rate. Speaker Boehner keeps insisting that we ". . . don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem" and that raising taxes is a "nonstarter". Which further let's us know that the deficit debate is neither about job creation nor fiscal responsibility.
If Washington was serious, you would hear pragmatic debates that put everything on the table. For example, if jobs need to be created, how about lowering the corporate tax to between 15-17%? Let the corporations know that if they bring jobs to America they will not have to start paying corporate taxes for the first five years. Then close every loophole that rewards companies that take jobs overseas and raise the tariffs. This would lure the companies that have fled to Ireland, China, India and Singapore due to the fact that we have the highest corporate tax in the world. In addition, it would encourage foreign corporations to build in America. This would put people back to work and broaden the tax base.
Allow the Bush tax cuts to expire and reform the tax code. Limit tax deductions and credits; and these should only apply to taxes paid. The government is hemorrhaging revenue every year with people receiving end of the year tax bonuses as refunds. If you owe me $20 and pay me $30, when I give back $10 that is a refund. Even if I took into account something notable that you did and cancelled the debt, your refund will be $30.
However, if you owe me $20, pay me $30 and I give you a check back for $375, only $30 is a refund. The rest is a bonus. This practice needs to stop if we take fiscal responsibility serious. Individuals and corporations are getting away with billions of dollars that could go toward cutting the deficit. If we curtailed this practice, we would be well on our way to cutting the deficit significantly.
For the likes of Rep. Broun, I have a novel ideal. Since it looks like we want to cut entitlement programs on the federal level, how about this? Since each Congressman and each Senator technically represent a state, how about taking every one of them off of the Federal payroll with the exception of the Speaker of the House and the president pro tempore. They should get paid by the people of their state. This would free up more revenue to help cut the deficit.
Now, of course you will never hear any of this in Washington because Washington is not serious. All you will hear is the deficit debate getting tossed around like the political football it is. The same goes for immigration reform and any other topic that can serve as a reliable "go to when the chips are down" issue when the subject needs to be changed. Remember "jobs, jobs, jobs"?
Follow @WyncThinks
Sunday, June 5, 2011
From Audacity Of Hope To Agony Of Wish
Much has been said about a billboard that had the image of former President George W. Bush with the words “Do you miss me yet?” Many progressives and liberals would readily respond, “No, it is like you never left!” After all, the Bush tax cuts have been extended, corporations are still enjoying massive profits while regular citizens suffer, Gitmo remains open, still running deficits and the Patriot Act has been freshly renewed. “What is there to miss?”
Three years after campaigning and rallying around a message of hope and change, progressives now are being admonished and publicly rebuked by the very champion who promised to be the vehicle of such hope and change. Today, they “hope” that their interests do not get further sacrificed and sold out by the very candidate who “changed” his tune upon becoming President. Liberals “hope” that seniors and poor children do not face devastating “changes” in coverage and assistance because the Capitulator in Chief has bargained away their safety net in order to finance more tax cuts for the wealthiest top 2%.
If there is buyer’s remorse, it does not go back to the general election but to the primary election. Many are wondering if perhaps they should have helped put significantly more than 18 million cracks in that glass ceiling. Many now wish that Hillary Clinton would have prevailed. Her reputation as a fighter and possessing a rigid back bone may have proven quite useful in rallying support and winning the fight for a viable healthcare program that included at least the public option if not a single payer plan. Would a President Hillary Clinton have stood up to the Republicans and allowed the Bush tax cuts to expire? I guess they will never know.
Instead they have had to endure with utter consternation and frustration, a President that they once held as a champion of progressive values, acquiesce and surrender to conservative stipulations on a consistent basis. After cowering and submitting to the demands of the right, he then turns and repudiates the very base that enthusiastically supported him. President Obama has become a reactionary President. He neither sets the narrative nor the agenda, instead he listens to Republican talking points and policy proposals, then seeks to endorse them with minor changes; and afterwards, publicly hails it as a great compromise.
Where is the bold leadership that was going to be transformative and change the trajectory of America? President Obama has not changed Washington. Washington has changed him. As a candidate, President Obama cited Ronald Reagan as the last transformative President. Although Reagan was Republican, he once stated that the last stand up President was Franklin D. Roosevelt. Reagan and Roosevelt had one thing in common that made them transformative. They set the agenda, owned the narrative and took their case to the people.
Progressives wish that President Obama was a transformative figure. Instead they have witnessed him fall into lock step with conservative ideology and only deviate enough to claim middle ground. Progressives wish President Obama would champion progressive ideas and articulate to the people why they make sense and should be adopted. Instead, he takes conservative sticking points off the table while readily bargaining away progressive values at every turn. Progressives wish they had elected a fighter but the audacity of hope has been replaced by the agony of wish.
Follow @WyncThinks
Three years after campaigning and rallying around a message of hope and change, progressives now are being admonished and publicly rebuked by the very champion who promised to be the vehicle of such hope and change. Today, they “hope” that their interests do not get further sacrificed and sold out by the very candidate who “changed” his tune upon becoming President. Liberals “hope” that seniors and poor children do not face devastating “changes” in coverage and assistance because the Capitulator in Chief has bargained away their safety net in order to finance more tax cuts for the wealthiest top 2%.
If there is buyer’s remorse, it does not go back to the general election but to the primary election. Many are wondering if perhaps they should have helped put significantly more than 18 million cracks in that glass ceiling. Many now wish that Hillary Clinton would have prevailed. Her reputation as a fighter and possessing a rigid back bone may have proven quite useful in rallying support and winning the fight for a viable healthcare program that included at least the public option if not a single payer plan. Would a President Hillary Clinton have stood up to the Republicans and allowed the Bush tax cuts to expire? I guess they will never know.
Instead they have had to endure with utter consternation and frustration, a President that they once held as a champion of progressive values, acquiesce and surrender to conservative stipulations on a consistent basis. After cowering and submitting to the demands of the right, he then turns and repudiates the very base that enthusiastically supported him. President Obama has become a reactionary President. He neither sets the narrative nor the agenda, instead he listens to Republican talking points and policy proposals, then seeks to endorse them with minor changes; and afterwards, publicly hails it as a great compromise.
Where is the bold leadership that was going to be transformative and change the trajectory of America? President Obama has not changed Washington. Washington has changed him. As a candidate, President Obama cited Ronald Reagan as the last transformative President. Although Reagan was Republican, he once stated that the last stand up President was Franklin D. Roosevelt. Reagan and Roosevelt had one thing in common that made them transformative. They set the agenda, owned the narrative and took their case to the people.
Progressives wish that President Obama was a transformative figure. Instead they have witnessed him fall into lock step with conservative ideology and only deviate enough to claim middle ground. Progressives wish President Obama would champion progressive ideas and articulate to the people why they make sense and should be adopted. Instead, he takes conservative sticking points off the table while readily bargaining away progressive values at every turn. Progressives wish they had elected a fighter but the audacity of hope has been replaced by the agony of wish.
Follow @WyncThinks
Saturday, June 4, 2011
Sarah Palin Will Not Run
Ok . . . enough already with the “Sarah Palin may run for President” nonsense. She is NOT running. Even she knows that her negatives outweigh her positives. Sarah Palin is not giving up her lucrative job at Fox News, where all she has to do is spout talking points and criticize the very media that lavishes her with the attention she craves, to run for President.
The fact that she, like Mike Huckabee, is still employed by Fox News, at this point, is a big indicator that she has no intentions of running. Palin has not even chosen an exploratory committee! The only funds that she is actively raising right now are going toward the coffers of her new found wealth.
However, we must commend her for her ability to continue to be seen as politically relevant even though, on any political topic, Palin has never proven herself to be anything more than an intramural athlete trying to compete in the major leagues. Anyone can launch attacks from the bleachers. Anyone can Monday morning armchair quarterback. However, once you step on the field of play or the stage and the spotlight is on you, that is when all of your sideline theories get examined, tested and go to ruin if you have not adequately prepared yourself.
Although she will always be willing to chime in on other people’s stated positions, Sarah Palin will never voluntarily put herself in a position where she will have to answer legitimate policy questions in detail. Needless to say, Palin has not shown that she is prepared for a Presidential run.
Oh yes, Sarah Palin can continue to denigrate the “lame stream” media that she courts all of the time. It is becoming more evident that she does this as a cover for dodging media questions rather than media coverage. Palin loves the coverage but hates the questions. That is why the bus tour was a great self marketing and publicity stunt. Palin is able to whip up a media frenzy without having to be pinned down on the specifics of where she stands on policy.
Yes, I know that many Palin supporters are going to label this a “hit job”. To you I ask one question. Can you tell me, in detail, any plan that she has to deal with any major crisis going on in the US or the world today? In the words of Katt Williams, “Don’t worry. I‘ll wait.” The truth is you can’t give me anything except general talking points and grenade tosses with no substantive details. She has charisma without substance and those of you who succumb to such charisma without substance are vain idolaters.
Furthermore, Palin found out that she wasn’t ready for the world stage when she took her trip to India where she spoke for about twenty seconds on the American tradition to not attack a sitting President on foreign soil. Then she proceeded to attack him. Afterwards, Palin went to Israel where she issued some provocative statements, met with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then quietly eased out of Israel.
The half term former governor of Alaska quit her post to pursue fame and fortune. A run for the Presidency is not a part of that. Palin’s self promotion and marketing schemes have proven to be substantially more profitable than her position as Governor of the state of Alaska. Right now, she is doing what any shrewd businessperson would do, which is cashing in on some free publicity and promotion while she is still seen as relevant. However, she is little more than an individual whose fifteen minutes of fame ran about three years too long.
Follow @WyncThinks
The fact that she, like Mike Huckabee, is still employed by Fox News, at this point, is a big indicator that she has no intentions of running. Palin has not even chosen an exploratory committee! The only funds that she is actively raising right now are going toward the coffers of her new found wealth.
However, we must commend her for her ability to continue to be seen as politically relevant even though, on any political topic, Palin has never proven herself to be anything more than an intramural athlete trying to compete in the major leagues. Anyone can launch attacks from the bleachers. Anyone can Monday morning armchair quarterback. However, once you step on the field of play or the stage and the spotlight is on you, that is when all of your sideline theories get examined, tested and go to ruin if you have not adequately prepared yourself.
Although she will always be willing to chime in on other people’s stated positions, Sarah Palin will never voluntarily put herself in a position where she will have to answer legitimate policy questions in detail. Needless to say, Palin has not shown that she is prepared for a Presidential run.
Oh yes, Sarah Palin can continue to denigrate the “lame stream” media that she courts all of the time. It is becoming more evident that she does this as a cover for dodging media questions rather than media coverage. Palin loves the coverage but hates the questions. That is why the bus tour was a great self marketing and publicity stunt. Palin is able to whip up a media frenzy without having to be pinned down on the specifics of where she stands on policy.
Yes, I know that many Palin supporters are going to label this a “hit job”. To you I ask one question. Can you tell me, in detail, any plan that she has to deal with any major crisis going on in the US or the world today? In the words of Katt Williams, “Don’t worry. I‘ll wait.” The truth is you can’t give me anything except general talking points and grenade tosses with no substantive details. She has charisma without substance and those of you who succumb to such charisma without substance are vain idolaters.
Furthermore, Palin found out that she wasn’t ready for the world stage when she took her trip to India where she spoke for about twenty seconds on the American tradition to not attack a sitting President on foreign soil. Then she proceeded to attack him. Afterwards, Palin went to Israel where she issued some provocative statements, met with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then quietly eased out of Israel.
The half term former governor of Alaska quit her post to pursue fame and fortune. A run for the Presidency is not a part of that. Palin’s self promotion and marketing schemes have proven to be substantially more profitable than her position as Governor of the state of Alaska. Right now, she is doing what any shrewd businessperson would do, which is cashing in on some free publicity and promotion while she is still seen as relevant. However, she is little more than an individual whose fifteen minutes of fame ran about three years too long.
Follow @WyncThinks
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)