And so this is Christmas....

Once again we are at that time of year.

Our hard fight and promise of REAL healthcare reform is being stalled and compromised down to Big insurance favors, our hopes of climate legislation is being ambushed by fake and misrepresented rhetoric and scandals, and we are ending a mistake of a war in Iraq to start another mistake in Afghanistan.

Oh.. and it's Christmas time!

And how can you NOT feel the Christmas spirit in the air this year? Despite the millions who are unemployed and probably cannot afford gifts this year for their families. Despite the ones who are uninsured and are one accident or illness away from unaffordable medical bills which leads to overwhelming debt. Despite the insured that were not covered even though they have paid for it. Despite the ones who may be spending next Christmas in Afghanistan fighting a war that has been "dithered" by the previous administration to the point where it may now be un-winnable.

Happy Holidays!

And for those of you who still can't feel the holiday joy and forgot what Christmas is all about, don't worry.....

The Republicans are on it as we speak!

What is that you ask?

Well no..... they are not proposing any ideas to fix the economy. They recommend tax cuts for the rich and deregulation, things that have failed every president to try them and helped create the economic crisis in the first place.

No..... they are not doing anything to fix our broken healthcare system. They presented their healthcare bill a little while back and the CBO wiped their ass with it and gave it back.

No... they do not want to end the war (duh). They actually want more troops and criticize the president for dithering. Even though the Republicans dithered for 7 years and never complained when Bush rejected Gen. McKiernan's request for 22,000 additional troops in Afghanistan. Obama later approved the request and the surge decision he "dithered" on would not take effect until 2010 regardless of when he made it.

Republicans are not doing much of anything about these things, except attempting to obstruct them. Besides, they are doing something much more important anyway....

The Republicans are working through a bill that tells us what Christmas is!

44 Republicans have introduced a Resolution to honor Christmas! And it goes something like this......

Whereas Christmas is a national holiday celebrated on December 25; and

Whereas the Framers intended that the First Amendment of the Constitution, in prohibiting the establishment of religion, would not prohibit any mention of religion or reference to God in civic dialog: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives–

(1) recognizes the importance of the symbols and traditions of Christmas;

(2) strongly disapproves of attempts to ban references to Christmas; and

(3) expresses support for the use of these symbols and traditions by those who celebrate Christmas.

Well at least this isn't one of those frivolous bills. Like in October, when Democrats passed a resolution to honor the birthday of the Chinese philosopher Confucius.

House minority leader John Boehner even gave the Democrats some heat for lack of priority and wasting congress's time....

"While Democrats get ready to celebrate the birth of an ancient Chinese philosopher, House Republicans will talk about our better solutions to create jobs and make health care more affordable and accessible for America’ s seniors. It is unacceptable for Congress to take it easy at a time when the nation’s unemployment rate is nearing 10 percent and millions of out-of-work families struggling to make ends meet are asking, “where are the jobs?”

I actually do agree with Boehner here to certain extent. In these uncertain times we are in at the moment, we should be more focused on the issues that matter most. I have no problem with honoring Confucius's birthday that I know of, but healthcare and the economy must get complete attention. All Boehner is saying is that we don't need frivolous resolutions like this......

H.R. 870: Resolution to officially commemorate the 9/12 taxpayer march on Washington

76 Republicans are on board with Glenn Beck. And much like Beck, they produce fact-less and extreme partisan hyper babble like this....

RESOLUTION

Expressing gratitude and appreciation to the individuals and families who participated in the Taxpayer March on Washington on September 12, 2009.

Whereas, on September 12, 2009, hundreds of thousands of American patriots, who refuse to sit idly by as the Federal Government advances skyrocketing deficits, taxpayer-funded bailouts, pork-barrel projects, burdensome taxes, unaccountable policy czars, command-and-control energy policy, and a government takeover of health care, came to Washington, DC, to show their disapproval;

Whereas individuals also wanted to convey their displeasure with the future tax increases that will be required to pay for deficit-financed spending;

Whereas these individuals understand that the fundamental American principles of limited government and personal liberty are under direct assault;

Whereas this dedicated group of freedom-loving Americans believe in open, accountable, responsible, constitutionally based government;

Whereas hundreds of buses, multiple caravans of cars from across the country, and many individually chartered flights, as well as thousands of lone-traveling cars and trucks, brought these patriots to Washington, DC, solely for this event;

Whereas these individuals endured considerable personal expense to get to the march, including transportation and lodging expenses, as well as lost wages in many instances;

Whereas estimates of the number of people who peacefully marched from Freedom Plaza to the West Front of the U.S. Capitol on September 12, 2009, range as high as 1,700,000 marchers;

Whereas all 50 States were represented in the march;

Whereas this event is considered to be the largest ever gathering of fiscal conservatives in Washington, DC;

Whereas special accolades are due to the grassroots citizens organizations across the country who helped individuals exercise their constitutionally protected First Amendment rights in the Nation’s capital; and

Whereas when the current trends of government expansion and freedom retrenchment are reversed, it will be due in large part to the efforts of the hundreds of thousands who marched on Washington, DC, on September 12, 2009: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives expresses its gratitude and appreciation to the hundreds of thousands of people who marched on Washington, DC, on September 12, 2009, to show their love of liberty and their grievance with recent government actions.

For the record, it was 60,000 to 70,000 in attendance by the Washington D.C. Fire Department's count, but the Fire Dept. is a socialist organization and known to have a rampant liberal bias. So they decided to trust the completely non bias reports of Fox "News" and Michelle Malkin, who got their numbers from counts done by photographs of the event.

Is this the kind of thing John Boehner was talking about?

Oh well, at least the Christmas resolution isn't frivolous or wasteful. Thank goodness the Republicans are there to educate us on what Christmas is, while the elitist left just insults our intelligence.

And who better to clarify how we should celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ than the Republicans? The party that is pro-war, pro-rich, pro-healthcare for profit, pro-death penalty, pro-rape (30 of them), pro-life (only until your born), pro-gun, anti-gay, and countless adultery at C-Street.

I'm sure Jesus is very proud of the Republicans these days.

However, maybe I'm being to harsh. I should reserve judgement until the CBO scores the Christmas resolution. So that we can see how many jobs it creates and/or saves, or how much it lowers healthcare costs.

And now the soldiers who will be sent to fight in an uncertain and possibly un-winnable war in Afghanistan will be fighting for America and fighting against the evil-doers who are trying to ban references to Christmas.

I just have one question.....

Exactly who is trying to ban Christmas?

THEIR Messiah: Would he be Welcome in Today's Republican Party?

2008 was not a good year for the Republicans.

After 8 years of George W. Bush, who was leaving office with record low approval ratings, along with Republicans witnessing one of the nastiest, sloppiest campaigns to remain in the White House with candidates the party was half-hearted about at best...

Barack Obama won the presidential election with an exceptional margin.

And the Republicans have been scrambling ever since.....

Here at the end of 2009, it has been said and viewed that the traditional GOP and the hardline tea party conservatives are in a political civil war. With more and more third party conservative candidates running against the Republican brand in 2010, it appears the teabagger's strategy is to split the vote and destroy any hope of stopping the one man they blame for everything that has ever went wrong throughout history.

But if you ask me, it's hard to tell the difference between the two. They are in step and holding hands politically, possibly even some heavy petting. Or God forbid, some good old fashioned unprotected pre-marital sex! .... Okay, I'll stop...

When you have GOP leadership holding tea party events and skipping out on work to give speeches at these events, it says a lot. It says that the far right is moving farther to the right and is out of options of their own. That they would rather cater to the angry mob of deficit hawks as of January '09 and anti-government military supporters and medicare recipients. They would rather blend in with the "grassroots" citizens that are bused in and equipped with prepared talking points and offensive signs. They would rather seek refuge in the fringe than practice the moderation they so blatantly preach to the left.

As for the moderates that are left in the Republican party, they are either facing primary challengers from the RNC or third party conservatives.

They have resorted to eating their own.

And if you don't believe me, then please explain the Purity test ..... that 40 Republicans failed. Ouch.

I don't think any of this will help the Republican brand. I would even go as far to say that it will make things worse. If the RNC continues to alter itself more hardline and let the far-right fringe protesters take over the party, it will be more damaging to the GOP than the 8 years of Republican rule were.

Yes! I am aware that far-left liberals protested profusely under Bush. (Most were in protest of a war in Iraq, a country that has never attacked us and was no threat to us) The difference is though, that you didn't see figures such as Nancy Pelosi and/or Harry Reid out there setting up anti-Bush rallies and speaking at them. Directly connecting themselves to their cause and embracing them.

Anyway, my point is not to ramble on about what conservatives are up to these days. It's more about who they look up to.

Civil war within the base or not, every conservative from the most hawkish neo-con to the most socially moderate Eisenhower Republican can and do agree on one thing......

That Ronald Reagan is a God!

Decades later, this brand of Kool-Aid has not worn off. The ideology and beliefs of Ronald Reagan stand firm and honored in all sectors of today's Republican party. Today's GOP still believes in "Reaganomics" (Trickle-down economics) that never really trickled down, and still repeat Reagan's mantra about how government is the problem and now they blame it for all of America's problems. In this day and age of ACORN and socialism, conservatives long for the days when Ronald Reagan would have put a stop to all this liberal nonsense.

Although, a little research and examination makes one wonder.....

Would Reagan be accepted? Would the "Gipper" be pure enough for today's hardline conservative and Republican parties? Reagan? Not conservative enough? Scary thought, huh? If we break down Reagan's policy and legislation and compare it to the political argument raised by teabaggers and hardline Republicans, it turns out that Reagan could be considered in today's political climate as just another RINO. That or many of the fringe right are hypocrites, but there is no way that can be possible.... is there?

For example, teabaggers claim that they are protesting the rampant spending and deficit of the current administration. First off, they have a lot of nerve after not only being completely silent when W. rampantly spent and created a record deficit but even defending it. They may have the gull, but they also have a short memory.

When Reagan took office our national debt was about $953 Billion. When Reagan left office our national debt was at $2.7 Trillion. The deficit rose by almost 3 times it's initial size during the Reagan years.

As far as spending, it went up 57% under Reagan. At about 7% a year. Although most of the jump in spending was for defense, the one government program Republicans DO love and love pouring money into. However in the dry grit of our situation here, Reagan also increased spending.

While we are on the subject of the economy, lets look at a few other things that you might not know about everyone's favorite Republican.... or at least the things that the right never tells you about him.... or maybe they just don't know...

Like Reagan's campaign promise as governor to "send the welfare bums back to work" ...... Charming!

Also as Governor, Reagan opposed worker's rights by opposing the efforts of the United Farm Workers to improve working conditions and wages for vulnerable migrant agricultural laborers. Also, he vetoed the California Agricultural Labor Relations Act that would give farm workers the right to unionize.

He opposed women's rights by opposing the Equal Rights Amendment that gives equal rights to women.

Under Reagan, productivity increased while working class wages remained frozen.

The teabaggers also fear that the democrats will raise their taxes. This is one of the biggest confusions in politics right now. Republicans say that they are about lower taxes, and they are..... for the rich. Unless you are in that top 1%, you have most likely seen a tax increase under republican presidents and have seen your taxes reduced under democratic presidents.

Reagan took this to the next level and virtually cut the richest Americans taxes in half over his presidency.

26-Oct-09
Historical Highest Marginal Income Tax Rates

Year Top Marginal Rate

1913 7.0% 1946 86.45% 1979 70.00%
1914 7.0% 1947 86.45% 1980 70.00% -----------
1915 7.0% 1948 82.13% 1981 69.13% T
1916 15.0% 1949 82.13% 1982 50.00% A
1917 67.0% 1950 91.00% 1983 50.00% X
1918 77.0% 1951 91.00% 1984 50.00%
1919 73.0% 1952 92.00% 1985 50.00% C
1920 73.0% 1953 92.00% 1986 50.00% U
1921 73.0% 1954 91.00% 1987 38.50% T
1922 56.0% 1955 91.00% 1988 28.00% ----------
1923 56.0% 1956 91.00% 1989 28.00%
1924 46.0% 1957 91.00% 1990 31.00%
1925 25.0% 1958 91.00% 1991 31.00%
1926 25.0% 1959 91.00% 1992 31.00%
1927 25.0% 1960 91.00% 1993 39.60%
1928 25.0% 1961 91.00% 1994 39.60%
1929 24.0% 1962 91.00% 1995 39.60%
1930 25.0% 1963 91.00% 1996 39.60%
1931 25.0% 1964 77.00% 1997 39.60%
1932 63.0% 1965 70.00% 1998 39.60%
1933 63.0% 1966 70.00% 1999 39.60%
1934 63.0% 1967 70.00% 2000 39.60%
1935 63.0% 1968 75.25% 2001 38.60%
1936 79.0% 1969 77.00% 2002 38.60%
1937 79.0% 1970 71.75% 2003 35.00%
1938 79.0% 1971 70.00% 2004 35.00%
1939 79.0% 1972 70.00% 2005 35.00%
1940 81.10% 1973 70.00% 2006 35.00%
1941 81.00% 1974 70.00% 2007 35.00%
1942 88.00% 1975 70.00% 2008 35.00%
1943 88.00% 1976 70.00% 2009 35.00%
1944 94.00% 1977 70.00% 2010 35.00%
1945 94.00% 1978 70.00%

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org

The wealth never trickled down and the rich got richer while the poor got poorer. The 80's was the "Me" generation. Ayn Rand couldn't have been happier and Reagan showed a nation how to smile as they killed. How to gift wrap greed and sell it to a gullible nation that will turn a blind eye to it's own best interest in order to make a point to someone, somewhere. Reaganomics was great, if you root for the bad guy in the movies.

Oh well, surely he would be in line with the conservatives 100% on social issues like abortion, gun control, and immigration?

Well, kind of, but a look at Reagan's record may of had him facing a primary challenger and apologizing to Rush Limbaugh in today's GOP.

In 1967, when Reagan was governor of California, he signed the Therapeutic Abortion Act. This law has been said to be the most liberal abortion law in America before Roe v Wade. Believe it or not, it also allowed abortions to be covered by California's state Medicaid program. Federal funds for abortions...... I hear that one is a big No-No.

Of course later on in Reagan's political career he strongly opposed abortion. This is said to be because so many abortions were performed under the Therapeutic Abortion Act, even more than the sponsors of the bill ever imagined there would be. Reagan's abortion law ultimately turned Reagan against abortion. You could say the Therapeutic Abortion Act worked too good.

Even though he later denounced abortion after being responsible for so many, would the teabaggers accept this kind of behavior from let's say.... President Obama? Of course not! Abortion is obviously a very important issue to the teabaggers and the pro-life movement. So they must hate Reagan, right? I mean, once a baby killer, always a baby killer?

The tea party protesters and most of the right have made it clear that they will reign holy hell on us wimpy liberals if we take their guns away. And they have been sweating bullets since Obama's election that he would take them back to the days of using a bow and arrow to kill people. If only reading and research made them feel as good as a loaded weapon does. Then maybe they would actually know who is trying to take their guns away from them, if anyone.

So far President Obama and the democrats have not passed or even pushed one anti-gun bill or law. Actually, as of this year, you can now carry guns in public parks, some bars, colleges, and check them on trains; where you could not before Obama took office. If President Obama is trying to take your guns away.... he is going about it the wrong way.

As for the first sitting President to address the NRA......

Once again in 1967, as governor, Reagan signed into law the Mulford Act, a law that forbid the carrying of weapons in public. In 1991, he publicly supported the Brady Bill, a bill that would establish a waiting period for gun purchases and was heavily opposed by the NRA and guns rights groups.

So as it stands right now, Reagan has done more to take your guns away than Obama has.

Immigration is a big heated issue, as we are about to find out next year when immigration reform makes it's way to the center stage in congress. The right is very clear, cut, and dry when it comes to immigration. If you are an illegal immigrant you should get out. That simple. That's how Reagan would do it, right?

In 1986, now as president, Reagan signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. This bill allowed a path of amnesty for illegal immigrants who could prove that they have been in the U.S. for a certain period of time.

Remember this fact when immigration reform starts up.


While much of what I state about Reagan in this blog is from way back when he was just the governor of California, actions are still actions, and they speak louder than words. Most on the right would pounce on these same actions if a liberal did them. They hold large protests now at the mere thought of democrats doing it. They dig deep into the early years of President Obama's czars trying to fetch any scrap they can, anything to make this president look bad. Yet most of them probably cannot name a single one of Bush's 47 czars off the top of their heads. They shutter at the thought of democrats enacting these crazy socialist laws that mostly seem to work. But when one of theirs does it..... cricket.... cricket. Sweet silence.

Would it be rude of me to suggest that the republicans are very much about "Do as they say, not as they do"?

Due to his record, Ronald Reagan would probably fail the "purity" tests of today's GOP and would probably be seen as a RINO. I am not pointing this out for ridicule or humor. I am pointing it out because it scares the crap out of me. The republican party use to be something great, that even I as a progressive liberal have always admired. Though anymore, it just seems like a slippery slope toward objectivism and obstruction.

As for the tea party protesters, I can only come to 3 possible conclusions as to why they have let Reagan and so many other Republicans off the hook for doing the very things they claim Democrats are doing. Either......

1. They don't know
2. They don't care
3. They don't care enough to know

Or just maybe.....\

4. They hate Obama more than they love America.


Do as they say, not as they do.....

What happens when people stop doing both?

UPDATE: RAPE-publicans: It's all Franken's Fault?

Courtesy of TPM & dailyKOS

Senate GOPers: It's Al Franken's Fault We're Being Attacked For Votes Against Anti-Rape Amendment

The Politico reports that Senate Republicans are outraged at Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) due to their votes against an amendment he introduced, to crack down on the rape of employees of military contractors, now being used against them:

The Republicans are steamed at Franken because partisans on the left are using a measure he sponsored to paint them as rapist sympathizers -- and because Franken isn't doing much to stop them.

"Trying to tap into the natural sympathy that we have for this victim of this rape --and use that as a justification to frankly misrepresent and embarrass his colleagues, I don't think it's a very constructive thing," Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said in an interview.

...

"I don't know what his motivation was for taking us on, but I would hope that we won't see a lot of Daily Kos-inspired amendments in the future coming from him," said South Dakota Sen. John Thune, No. 4 in the Senate Republican leadership. "I think hopefully he'll settle down and do kind of the serious work of legislating that's important to Minnesota."

No, this is not The Onion.

This is real.

"The Party of NO".... Unless we are talking about rape.

In that case, go crazy!

The Republican party obviously has.....

The Fatal Four

With the final vote on the healthcare bill approaching slowly but surely, a nation is on the edge of its seat.

After months of debate and full-blown argument over whether or not to reform our broken healthcare system, the time is coming where history will be made one way or the other.

It seems for democrats that a healthcare reform bill with a government-run public option will either be a historic victory that will better change the way we care for our fellow Americans, or it will be yet another embarrassing loss just like the time before that and the time before that. It will be their defining moment or their Waterloo.

While the momentum feels slightly on the democrat's side (at least to me anyway), predicting how this will ultimately play out is nothing more than a guessing game at this point.... or just wishful thinking.

After months of debating and arguing with the republicans on this issue, it turns out that if healthcare reform does not pass it will not be because of republicans. They do not plan on helping democrats pass healthcare reform but if this bill does not pass it will be because of a few people, maybe even one. And not a one of them are republican.

When it comes to the healthcare debate that raged on this past summer, the democrats had their guns pointed at an enemy that didn't even have a sling shot. The democrats biggest threat for healthcare reform are the democrats.

The republicans have made it loud and clear that they do not want anything to do with this bill.

So let's oblige them!

Let's shift our focus to the ones who actually could nix this and have threatened to stop us dead in our tracks on healthcare reform.

I bring you.....

The Fatal Four!


It sounds like an action movie about four deadly ninjas or kung-fu badasses.

But in reality it is about four well bought, handsomely paid senators who have the power to give our healthcare reform bill a lethal one inch punch of death.

This movie could also be called "Three Bluedogs & a Weasel"

Anyway, here are the stars of our motion picture.....


First on the list is Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson.

Ben Nelson is a democrat in a traditional red state. While he voted to allow debate and has shown slight interest in a state "opt-out" public option, he has repeatedly slammed the idea of a public option in the healthcare bill and said he has no problem being the only democrat to vote against it.

And while I'm sure this has nothing to do with his stance on healthcare reform, it seems Ben Nelson has received over $1 Million from big insurance over his career and has received $452,586 this year alone for his campaign committee. A number of Nelson's staff are former healthcare lobbyist and many have left Nelson's team to go work for big insurance. - campaignmoney.org & OpenSecrets.org

But I'm sure this has nothing to do with why Ben Nelson would not want private insurance to have any competition....

Because it certainly is not his constituents influencing his decision.

Recent polls show that Nebraska slightly supports the public option. Since he is a democrat in a red state, he may face political backfire anyway he votes. Although I would take into consideration that in that red state, a slight majority supports the public option.... in a red state!

Maybe I'm crazy, but I think it says something when a red state backs a blue initiative? Even though this is only stated in a few polls. Even if it were 50/50, that would still speak volumes that the public option is a popular idea, even in Nebraska.

Also, 11% of Nebraska have no health insurance.

But I guess that 11% also can't afford to give Senator Nelson hundreds of thousands of dollars so that he would actually represent them.


Next on the list is Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu. She is not as intense in her dislike of the public option as Ben Nelson, but she is still very shaky on the idea.

Now when it comes to taking money from insurance, Landrieu does have Nelson beat at $1.6 Million to his $1.3 Million. But a few hundred thousand is chump change amongst these millionaires. It's just that we're the chumps.....

Senator Landrieu's staff is also riddled with insurance lobbyist. Another stunning fact is that 64% of her campaign fund are from out-of-state donors. Louisiana, the state she is suppose to be representing only gives her 36%. - campaignmoney.org & OpenSecrets.org

When Landrieu was asked about many polls showing support for the public option in her state, she said that the polls were faulty because its in how you ask the questions. The she went on in the same interview to say that the public was confused about the public option because they think it is free healthcare and that could be the reason for it's support.

So the polls are all fake and we are too stupid to understand the public option?

Since it's all in the questions, I have one for you Senator Landrieu......

Do you want to get re-elected?

Senator Landrieu has said she may be open to a "Opt-out" or "Opt-in" form of the public option, but of course we are too dumb to understand it!

21% of Louisiana are uninsured


Third is Arkansas Senator Blanche Lincoln. She has been pretty stern about her opposition to the public option. She has taken the less money from big insurance than anyone else in the fatal four. However, the measly half a million dollars she received from insurance was enough to buy her complete loyalty to them. - OpenSecrets.org

Her loyalty runs so deep that she even thinks competition would be bad for the insurance companies.

“One of our biggest concerns is that it doesn’t need to be a government plan that usurps that ability to compete in the marketplace, which I’m concerned that a totally government-run option would do,”

The fact that we now have a totally private-run monopoly does not concern Senator Lincoln. How dare we suggest that these "health" insurance companies that are increasingly responsible for their customers deaths and raise costs every chance they get be burdened with a competition that keeps costs down and won't deny you when you get sick.

When Senator Lincoln was expressing her concerns about government-run competition, i wonder if she thought to ask the whopping 34% of Arkansas with no health insurance about their concerns? Concerns that they don't get sick or injured?

With polls showing very strong support for the public option in Arkansas, Blanche Lincoln should be more concerned about her political future if she continues to shill for the insurance companies instead of her constituents.


Last and least..... Joe Lieberman. This one is the most interesting case because this could all possibly be a game and a publicity stunt. He has done this sort of thing in the past.

If it's not a stunt, it's political suicide.

Joe Lieberman is from Connecticut where an overwhelming majority support the public option. in fact, every district in Connecticut supports a public option. Connecticut is fairly liberal and if Lieberman is trying to get re-elected, he is going about it the wrong way. Supporting McCain during the last presidential election was one thing, but if he puts his money where his mouth is and blocks healthcare reform.... he's done in 2012. This is not an opinion, this is fact.

Speaking of money, Lieberman has received roughly $800,000 last year from big insurance. Not the highest paid by the insurance industry but he is the most vocal and prominent senator against a public option in healthcare reform.

The funny thing is though........

Connecticut ALREADY HAS a PUBLIC OPTION!

"Charter Oak Health Plan is a state-run program that is designed to compete in the market for individual insurance policies. That means people who are buying individual health care plans — the unemployed, young college graduates, early retirees — can get coverage under Charter Oak. The state has contracted with three insurers to offer a variety of coverage options. Premiums and deductibles depend on household income. " - Politifact.org

This plan insures 10,000 people in Connecticut.

So let me get this straight, Joe Lieberman says that a public option will destroy healthcare and that he will not support any sort of government option. Yet his state has a form of a public option that successfully covers 10,000 citizens in Connecticut?

Do you see why I think this is all a show being played by Lieberman?

I think that he has bolstered himself as the ringleader of anti-government healthcare on the left side of the isle because there is money to be made. He will be offered deals from both sides. His arms being pulled from both directions until he is bought by the highest bidder. While I do believe that if he even votes against the healthcare reform bill, let alone is the one that puts a stop to it; he will have a primary challenger so fast his head will spin, he is on some political safe-ground for one reason......

He is, after all, an independent.

But not even that will stop the firestorm that will reign upon him. He will hopefully be stripped of his chairmanships that he has with the democratic party (Still not sure how he backed McCain in 2008 and still has chairmanships with the democrats?) and face a primary challenger that will most likely beat him in 2012.

Joe Lieberman is either an idiot or a genius.

We'll find out soon.


Many are shaking in their boots over what these 100 senators are going to do to our healthcare system. Some are afraid the process will politicize and compromise away any hope of getting REAL healthcare reform to America. While critics are afraid of a so-called government takeover of our healthcare system that will slowly strip away freedoms and bring about red socialism that will kill your pets.

There is no raving confidence coming from either side right now, but I am rooting for this and continue to remain an optimist.

I think we are all good-hearted people and it is in our blood to help others in need. I think that since the beginning of time we have revolted against suffering, injustice, corruption, and greed. Even though there have been certain periods where this idea, this philosophy has been muted and smothered, it has never died. While there is still so much work to be done, we have came a long way as human beings in our fight for fairness, tolerance, and peace. As people, we will always differ and view the world through different lenses, but when we lose our ability to care for all people equally and keep close to heart the principals of "United we stand, Divided we fall" and "I am my brother's keeper". When we let ourselves be convinced by opportunists that the kindness in our hearts is a weakness, that is when we lose everything.

I don't want to walk away from this learning and accepting more and more that we are just a country where our leaders are nothing more than corporate players in disguise as public servants and a country where money talks louder than it's very own people.

I refuse to believe that.

I believe that the voice of the millions of uninsured, who pray everyday that they do not get sick, speaks far louder than lobbyist money. The ones who have NO option. Some lost their jobs and therefor lost their coverage. Some are poor and can't afford insurance. Some of them were not eligible because they were not healthy enough and would cost the insurance company too much money. Whatever the situation, these people have no healthcare in the richest country in the world.

I think we need to start realizing that just because you are insured, does not mean you are covered.

I don't believe that money talks louder than the millions that have insurance but were not covered when the chips were down. Paying customers denied care because the insurance companies didn't want to part with the money that they got from customers who were tricked into thinking the health insurance industry was actually healthcare, and not just another corporation out to make a buck.

To call what we have now a healthcare system is laughable.

If the Fatal Four stop healthcare reform with a public option, they may prove more fatal to themselves than anyone else. They may be able to deny us a public option and our freedom of choice, but they will never be able to take away one option from us, one choice....

Our vote.

If they opt-out on us, we will opt-out on them!

How to End War

As I write this, we are close to finding out what President Obama's final decision will be for Afghanistan. Quite possibly the toughest decision the president has had to make thus far, with half the country saying "Go for it" and the other half saying "Don't you dare"... This will not be easy no matter what he does. Someone's about to be pissed off!

Supporters of the "War on Terror" handed down from the last administration argue that we must continue to wage the war. That we must not stop fighting terrorism until the world is rid of them. If this is possible?

Protesters of the war argue that it is an Un-winnable war that will turn into another Vietnam. That we will be sending lives and billions maybe trillions of dollars fighting an enemy that Russia failed to destroy roughly 20 years ago.

President Obama is between a rock and a hard place when it comes to Afghanistan.

Information out today suggests that we will probably get a compromise of some sort. The problem is that this, like so many other issues of the day, is an issue where the American public is not ready to make a deal.

In the midst of all this, many are asking another question.

How are we going to pay for this war?

This is one of the main concerns for Healthcare Reform, but the GOP is yet to wage such outrage about how we are going to pay for this war.

Shocker huh?


White House budget director Peter Orszag has estimated that it would cost $40 billion a year if Gen. McChrystal gets his wish of 40,000 additional troops. The pentagon has the figure at a slightly lower cost. He also said that it would destroy many other things that the Obama administration is trying to do with the economy.

Yep. Wars sure are expensive. You just never hear politicians complaining about the cost unless the money will be used here at home, on our citizens. But if it is to reign hell on a nation that most American's probably can't even correctly point to on a map..... well then take as much money as you need! It's only money!


But now, this could all possibly change....


Recently Rep. David Obey (D-Wisconsin) suggested that we should pay for the war by taxing the wealthy.

And it sounds so crazy, it just might work!

We all know very well that for democrats, the best way to get republicans against anything is to suggest that the rich pay for anything. As long as the bottom 95% are flouting the bill they can barely afford, no problems. But if we do something insane, like charging this war to the top 1% (who have more wealth than the bottom 95% combined) What will this do to the republican party?

Will the war still be worth fighting if the rich have to take a outrageous 1% surtax to pay for it?

During WWII, the rich paid 90% in taxes. If not for their contribution to their country, we may have lost that war. But today that would be called socialism.

Or.... this could lead to something bigger than we ever imagined.

If the rich have to pay for the war, maybe then they won't want the war?

When they have to pay their fair share, maybe that will trigger the peace and love that was in them all along. And all we had to do was threaten to raise their taxes a hair to help fight a war that effects everyone equally despite income and tax bracket.

On issues like healthcare reform, the cost factor and the fact that the rich may help pay for it has conservatives up in arms and dead set against it. If the Afghanistan war is paid for by a surtax on the rich, will we actually see anti-war republicans?

This could work.

If you want to rid the world of something, tax the rich for it and it will be gone.

If the rich start paying for our wars, we may never get into another one again.

The Magical Mystery Vote!

On Saturday, the Senate debated and then voted to further debate the Healthcare Reform Bill.

While there were a few scares here and there during the week, by Saturday afternoon the Senate Democrats said that they had enough votes pledged to guarantee passage for debate. Razor thin on party lines, the likely outcome was said to be 60 yay and 40 nay.

A few hours later the senate debated on and on about whether we should debate Healthcare.

And the final outcome..........

60-39?

What?

This means that someone didn't vote!

When I watched it live, the news anchors didn't even know who the mystery congressman was!

Who was this one congressman who did NOT have an opinion about the intense healthcare debate going on in our country?


Well after a few seconds of hard nose journalism...... I have tracked down this lone senator!

It turn out that it was none other than Sarah Palin's former running mate.......

John McCain

He channeled his inner Maverick and decided not to decide on a healthcare debate.

Fair enough...

I mean, it really didn't matter anyway.

To each his own!


But there is one thing I don't understand. Though nobody said understanding John McCain would be easy.

In my last post I wrote about the 30 senators that voted against the Al Franken Anti-Rape amendment. John McCain included in this list. Out of all the 30 republican senators who took one in the gut for their friends at Halliburton/KBR, John McCain's inclusion in this disappoints me the most. If anyone in Congress could understand the pain and TORTURE that 20-year-old Jamie Leigh Jones went through that night and why we must prevent it at all costs......

I would figure that it would be John McCain?

But I guess not....


So he doesn't vote when it comes to if we should debate reforming our broken healthcare system, yet boldly voted NO loud and clear, when it came to deciding that what happens at Halliburton, Stays at Halliburton. And that women have no rights there.

It is times like these that justify that we picked the better candidate in 2008.

John McCain: Rape at Halliburton..... Sure! Healthcare for Millions....... No Comment!


As I said.......

Nobody said understanding John McCain would be easy....

RAPE-PUBLICANS: Party of 30

Jamie Leigh Jones was an employee at Halliburton/KBR and In 2005 she was stationed in Baghdad, Iraq. She was 20 years old.

One night, several of her co-workers drugged her. Then they took turns raping her. The more compassionate of her attackers didn't beat her as they were gang-raping her. Though many weren't so nice.

She was left physically, mentally and emotionally scarred.

While nothing will ever take away the pain and suffering she must have felt that night, at least we live in a country that believes in justice and surely no company, not even Halliburton, would stand for this behavior from their employees!

Right?

This is where Halliburton fires every single employee involved and helps Jamie in any way she needs because it happened on their clock.

The rapist go to jail. Halliburton/KBR stands up for Jamie and fights to ensure that this will never happen again!

Sadly, Somehow, this is only wishful thinking....


Instead of doing the right thing, or even attempting to, Halliburton/KBR detain her in a shipping container for 24 hours with no food or water.

They tell her that if she leaves Iraq for medical treatment she will be out of a job.

And while she was confined, they placed armed guards outside of her container. Just incase SHE got out of line...

Now a prisoner for a crime that was committed on her, she convinces one of the guards to let her use their cell phone to call her father.

Then her father in turn, called their congressman Rep. Ted Poe R-TX.

Rep. Poe then goes on to call the state department.

The state department contacted the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, who then rescued her from confinement.


Before I continue, I just have one question....

What if Jamie was your daughter, sister, ECT.?


Years later, no justice was brought to Jamie and none of the rapist were arrested or even fired.

Then along came Al Franken.


Franken offered an amendment to the 2010 Defense Appropriations bill that would withhold defense contracts from companies like KBR "if they restrict their employees from taking workplace sexual assault, battery and discrimination cases to court."

Sounds pretty logical. right?

In my opinion, that is getting off light for Halliburton/KBR. They should be shut down quicker than you can say "Blood for Oil". But at least it is a step in the right direction.

I mean, if there was ever an issue that Republicans and Democrats could agree on, it would be that rape is bad!

Once again, Wishful Thinking....


While the amendment passed, 30 GOP Senators voted against Jamie and woman's rights and voted for Halliburton and rape.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I bring you, The Rape-publicans.....

Alexander (R-TN)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Gregg (R-NH)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Kyl (R-AZ)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)


Amongst these moral-less excuses for public servants, are people who vocally argue that ACORN is a corrupt group and should be shut down, who argue that your rights are being taken away from you by the evil president, and who have wives, daughters, sisters and women they love. I'm sure they would be horrified if what had happened to Jamie happened to their loved ones.

So let me get this straight......

ACORN (Accused with no proof of funding prostitution)=BAD

Halliburton/KBR (Imprisoned a 20 year old girl for being raped)=GOOD


Obama (Taking away our freedoms)(Can anyone name one freedom we have lost?)=BAD

Halliburton/KBR (Literally take away a young girls rights)=GOOD


If this wasn't so heartbreakingly sad, it would be humorous.


But maybe I'm being too harsh. Maybe the Dirty 30 have their reasons..... Lets see....

In the debate, Senator Sessions maintained that Franken's amendment overreached into the private sector and suggested that it violated the due process clause of the Constitution.

To which, Senator Franken fired back quoting the Constitution. "Article 1 Section 8 of our Constitution gives Congress the right to spend money for the welfare of our citizens. Because of this, Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote, 'Congress may attach conditions on the receipt of federal funds and has repeatedly employed that power to further broad policy objectives,'" Franken said. "That is why Congress could pass laws cutting off highway funds to states that didn't raise their drinking age to 21. That's why this whole bill [the Defense Appropriations bill] is full of limitations on contractors -- what bonuses they can give and what kind of health care they can offer. The spending power is a broad power and my amendment is well within it."

David Vitter was confronted by a rape victim at a convention. He had no answer to the woman as to why he voted for rape.

I guess it wouldn't help them to get re-elected if they just came out and said that they voted the way they did because Halliburton/KBG gives them a lot of money

Or that they are so partisan that they cannot bring themselves to vote on an amendment proposed by a democrat. Even if it is to stop rape within one of America's biggest companies.

If McCain ever says "Country First" again I will probably throw up!

But when it comes to getting re-elected, I don't think voting for rape is a good way of going about it. But we'll find out for many of them next year.

This is the party that is trying to convince us that they ARE for the people and not all about big business and corporations. This is the party that touts freedom and justice.

If you are reading this as a conservative republican and you feel ashamed and embarrassed.....

Don't fret, it is a good thing.

It means that you have more of a heart and conscience than 30 current U.S. Senators.

This is a new low.

Jamie Leigh Jones was elated and thankful to hear that the Franken Amendment was passed.

"It means that every tear shed to go public and repeat my story over and over again to make a difference for other women was worth it"

Sources: ABC News & Alternet.org