Tuesday, November 6, 2012
4 more years
Listening to disgruntled conservatives say they are ashamed of this country, after severely criticizing Mrs. Obama for saying she was finally proud of this country 4 years ago is exactly why I don't vote Republican anymore.
Monday, June 6, 2011
Tax cuts for the wealthy to create jobs?
When the "Bush Tax Cuts" were enacted in 2001 (Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA)), unemployment was at an average of 4.7%. When the second round was enacted in 2003 (Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (JGTRRA)), it was at an average of 6.0%. Now, 10 years later, the unemployment rate is around 9.0%.
Tell me again how these tax cuts are supposed to create jobs....?
Source: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000
Tell me again how these tax cuts are supposed to create jobs....?
Source: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Drunk on Tea
According to Chris Littleton, 31, helped found the Cincinnati Tea Party, ""We have three core values that really, I guess, span everything we do. ... One, a fundamental limitation of government. The limited government is key. We believe that the more control and influence the size of government, the more it grows, the less important the individual is. ... "And then the next would be fiscal responsibility. There is no excuse in the world why our government can’t be fiscally responsible. ... "And the last one is free markets or you could call it free enterprise. The ability to earn your own way, to generate your own wealth, to create your own American dream should be relatively free from all of the inhibitions of the government."
Melanie Morgan, 53, of San Francisco, is a former radio talk show host who has been working with the Tea Party Express, a California-based group. She states, '"I would define the Tea Party movement as a fiscal movement. This is not a movement based on social issues. Many conservatives are involved only because of the fiscal aspect of smaller government, of lower taxation, of an accountability as far as the debt is concerned, the runaway spending by the liberal Congress. These are the issues that motivate us, that animate us. We’re not talking abortion and we are not discussing gay marriage or anything that even comes close to approximating those issues... "
"The normal thing that people are looking for is some sort of organized structure, driven from the top down," says Mark Lloyd, chairman of the Lynchburg Tea Party in Virginia. "But ... it’s more of an attitude, and the attitude is of course just visceral patriotism, and a focus on limited government, fiscal responsibility, constitutional government or governance and personal liberties." (emphasis added) "We don’t get involved in the abortion issue, the gay marriage issue, because we feel like that’s when it starts dividing people," says Nita Thomas, leader of a group in Cincinnati.
Finally, Mark Meckler, a California lawyer and national coordinator of the Tea Party Patriots, says his group and others have denounced those who have made racially inflammatory remarks. "It’s demonstrated that the movement has matured," he says.
[The entire article here.]
Interesting....
Does this sound like they are focused on fiscal matters? Does this sound like a rallying cry for lower taxes? How about this (even though it was proven to be false?)
Oh, I know, it's that damned main stream media that's spreading lies and rumors. Since Fox News seems to have higher viewership than anyone else on the block, wouldn't that make them the "main stream-iest" of the news outlets? If you're used to your "fair and balanced" to be tilting to the right, perhaps those that are genuinely fair and balanced may appear off kilter to you.
Maybe you should change your beverage of choice and adjust your set....
Melanie Morgan, 53, of San Francisco, is a former radio talk show host who has been working with the Tea Party Express, a California-based group. She states, '"I would define the Tea Party movement as a fiscal movement. This is not a movement based on social issues. Many conservatives are involved only because of the fiscal aspect of smaller government, of lower taxation, of an accountability as far as the debt is concerned, the runaway spending by the liberal Congress. These are the issues that motivate us, that animate us. We’re not talking abortion and we are not discussing gay marriage or anything that even comes close to approximating those issues... "
"The normal thing that people are looking for is some sort of organized structure, driven from the top down," says Mark Lloyd, chairman of the Lynchburg Tea Party in Virginia. "But ... it’s more of an attitude, and the attitude is of course just visceral patriotism, and a focus on limited government, fiscal responsibility, constitutional government or governance and personal liberties." (emphasis added) "We don’t get involved in the abortion issue, the gay marriage issue, because we feel like that’s when it starts dividing people," says Nita Thomas, leader of a group in Cincinnati.
Finally, Mark Meckler, a California lawyer and national coordinator of the Tea Party Patriots, says his group and others have denounced those who have made racially inflammatory remarks. "It’s demonstrated that the movement has matured," he says.
[The entire article here.]
Interesting....
Does this sound like they are focused on fiscal matters? Does this sound like a rallying cry for lower taxes? How about this (even though it was proven to be false?)
Oh, I know, it's that damned main stream media that's spreading lies and rumors. Since Fox News seems to have higher viewership than anyone else on the block, wouldn't that make them the "main stream-iest" of the news outlets? If you're used to your "fair and balanced" to be tilting to the right, perhaps those that are genuinely fair and balanced may appear off kilter to you.
Maybe you should change your beverage of choice and adjust your set....
The Case Against Islam
I understand the argument that building the CULTURAL CENTER (which happens to include a mosque...as well as meeting space open to everyone and a memorial to those who died on 9/11) can be seen as insensitive, even though I strongly disagree with it. I disagree with it as I am able to make the distinction between Islam (like the two Islamic soldiers I went through Army Basic Training with, and Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan- if you don't know who that is, image Google his name) and radical Islam, just as George W. Bush did in 2003, and Glenn Beck did in 2006. And just as I am able to distinguish between those who would use a radicalized Islam as a political tool and those who use it as a religion, I am able to make the distinction between moderate Christians, and the radical politicized Christianity of Pat Robertson and Westboro Baptist Church.
What I don't understand is the protests against the Islamic Centers in Murfreesboro, TN, Sheboygen, WI, and Temecula, CA. If the uproar over the Center in Manhattan is over its proximity to Groound Zero, what is the reason for the protests over the Temecula Center (which is approximately 3,000 miles from Ground Zero)? It begs the question; are we really at war with Islam? By doing so, we are putting our troops in heightened danger as more and more moderate muslims see us as against not only against their beliefs that they so highly regard, but the freedom we so highly regard.
What I don't understand is the protests against the Islamic Centers in Murfreesboro, TN, Sheboygen, WI, and Temecula, CA. If the uproar over the Center in Manhattan is over its proximity to Groound Zero, what is the reason for the protests over the Temecula Center (which is approximately 3,000 miles from Ground Zero)? It begs the question; are we really at war with Islam? By doing so, we are putting our troops in heightened danger as more and more moderate muslims see us as against not only against their beliefs that they so highly regard, but the freedom we so highly regard.
Monday, August 16, 2010
the exclusiveness of religious freedom
Many are upset that permission has been given to proceed with the construction of the Islamic Cultural Center in New York near Ground Zero, and view it as a slap in the face to those who last their lives on 9/11, as well as the families of said victims, by giving a place of honor of some sort to the terrorists right next to where they committed their biggest crime against America and the American people, despite the fact this Cultural Center is sponsored by The Cordoba Initiative, which promotes "multi-cultural and multi-faith understanding across minds and borders", and "will include a September 11th memorial and quiet reflection space where people of different faith traditions and beliefs, sacred and secular, can find quiet time and solace. [It] will also include general spaces and world-class facilities for all New Yorkers to benefit from, whether that's a Hebrew class meeting weekly or a yoga studio looking for space on a regular basis. We'll have an auditorium to engage large audiences, and sophisticated classroom space as well." (Read more: http://blog.beliefnet.com/cityofbrass/2010/07/qa-with-sharif-el-gamal-about.html#ixzz0wayagFHA)
And here lies a fallacy of the right; if one Muslim is a terrorist, they all must be terrorists, and this "cultural center" will serve as a staging center for terrorists acts against the United States. The conservatives have no ability to draw a distinction between the one and the many. Based on this logic, one could make the case that Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber, was a Christian, and the abortion clinic bombers are Christian, therefore anyone who's a Christian must be a terrorist. But for some reason, that doesn't apply.
Even though there are victims groups, New York City leaders, and even jewish groups who all support the construction, there have been protests not only in New York, but all across the country involving people who have no more connection to 9/11 than what they saw on television that day. And they aren't just protesting the New York site, but all mosques everywhere. Many of these muslim communities have been in existence for quite some times, and are merely trying to create a larger, more amenable place to worship. However, right-wing fear mongers have drummed up the masses to protest the construction in Murfreesboro, Tennessee and Temecula, California. According to these protestors, Islam is a religion that not only advocates violence against those of other faiths, but actively promotes it. Never mind that the same thing could be said about Christianity. I'm pretty certain the individuals who bomb abortion clinics aren't getting thier "instruction" from the Koran.
.
The protests against the New York Islamic Cultural Center, as well as the centers in Tennessee and California, is a blatant disregard of the right to religious freedom as spelled out in the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights. I find it interesting that the conservatives are the loud enough when they feel the Constitution is subverted by the left, but seem to have no problem in doing it themselves (At this writing, the flashing header above the linked article is a plea to join the fight to stop the mosque in New York. Hypocracy at it's finest!) The settlers who first landed on these shores, among other things, wanted to establish a society where they could be free to worship as they chose. The Founding Fathers understood this, and that's why they made protection of religious freedom the number 1 amendment in the Bill of Rights.
One of the most annoying arguements I've run across in the comments section of many an article regarding this cultural center is that Islamic countries wouldn't allow a church to be built in their cities, so why should we allow a mosque in ours? Again, I refer to the principals of freedom upon which this country was based, and that which they lack. Do we really want to become a country like that? Isn't that why we are shedding blood in Afghanistan, to prevent this very sort of intolerance the Afghan people are subjected to? I submit that the prevention of this cultural center grants a victory to the very terrorists these protestors are afraid of by limiting the freedoms our country was based on, and instills an intolerance that they themselves have espoused.
EDIT: The imam behind the construction of the cultural center is being branded as a radical cleric who blames the U.S. for the 9/11 attacks. However, he has been in the employ of the FBI since the "glory days" of Bush/Cheney.
And here lies a fallacy of the right; if one Muslim is a terrorist, they all must be terrorists, and this "cultural center" will serve as a staging center for terrorists acts against the United States. The conservatives have no ability to draw a distinction between the one and the many. Based on this logic, one could make the case that Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber, was a Christian, and the abortion clinic bombers are Christian, therefore anyone who's a Christian must be a terrorist. But for some reason, that doesn't apply.
Even though there are victims groups, New York City leaders, and even jewish groups who all support the construction, there have been protests not only in New York, but all across the country involving people who have no more connection to 9/11 than what they saw on television that day. And they aren't just protesting the New York site, but all mosques everywhere. Many of these muslim communities have been in existence for quite some times, and are merely trying to create a larger, more amenable place to worship. However, right-wing fear mongers have drummed up the masses to protest the construction in Murfreesboro, Tennessee and Temecula, California. According to these protestors, Islam is a religion that not only advocates violence against those of other faiths, but actively promotes it. Never mind that the same thing could be said about Christianity. I'm pretty certain the individuals who bomb abortion clinics aren't getting thier "instruction" from the Koran.
.
The protests against the New York Islamic Cultural Center, as well as the centers in Tennessee and California, is a blatant disregard of the right to religious freedom as spelled out in the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights. I find it interesting that the conservatives are the loud enough when they feel the Constitution is subverted by the left, but seem to have no problem in doing it themselves (At this writing, the flashing header above the linked article is a plea to join the fight to stop the mosque in New York. Hypocracy at it's finest!) The settlers who first landed on these shores, among other things, wanted to establish a society where they could be free to worship as they chose. The Founding Fathers understood this, and that's why they made protection of religious freedom the number 1 amendment in the Bill of Rights.
One of the most annoying arguements I've run across in the comments section of many an article regarding this cultural center is that Islamic countries wouldn't allow a church to be built in their cities, so why should we allow a mosque in ours? Again, I refer to the principals of freedom upon which this country was based, and that which they lack. Do we really want to become a country like that? Isn't that why we are shedding blood in Afghanistan, to prevent this very sort of intolerance the Afghan people are subjected to? I submit that the prevention of this cultural center grants a victory to the very terrorists these protestors are afraid of by limiting the freedoms our country was based on, and instills an intolerance that they themselves have espoused.
EDIT: The imam behind the construction of the cultural center is being branded as a radical cleric who blames the U.S. for the 9/11 attacks. However, he has been in the employ of the FBI since the "glory days" of Bush/Cheney.
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
And so it begins...
This is a new blog for me. And if you're reading it, I'm happy to have you on board. However, before you continue, I think it only fair to give some disclaimers;
1) This is a political blog, designed to vent my rants and raves. Feel free to comment, but any flames toward anyone, especially me, you will be blocked.
2) I am left-leaning. Although I hope to be more centric than I am, (and perhaps this blog can help me achieve that) I make no apologies for my political preferences.
For most of my life, I have been pretty much apolitical. So why start this? My political leanings, if and when I decided to vote, used to be conservative Republican. However, the administration of President George W. Bush, in particular his decision to go to war in Iraq, turned me away from that ideology, perhaps forever. Since then, the more I read what the Republican Party, and conservatives in general, have to say, the more hypocracy I percieve, and the further I go to the left. So this is my self-created forum to fire back at all the irrational comments and articles I read based on my point of view and what I believe America stands for.
I've never held political office, and have not really spent time studying politics, but there are many others "out there" that do not have a political background, either, and take pride in being "just a concerned citizen outside the beltway". But that doesn't stop them from being completely offbase from what I believe America to be. America is not for one particular group, one particular religion, one particular race; America is for EVERYONE! And it stands in opposition to the liberty and freedom that America is when particular groups are not allowed to exercise the rights afforded everyone else, whether you like it or not.
Freedom is one of those things that seems to be different for everyone. No one can have complete, unfettered freedom without impeding on the freedom of someone else. That's why we have laws and rules, and a government to make sure everyone gets the prescribed freedom they are entitled to. Freedom isn't free. Sometimes it's paid for with blood, and sometimes it's paid for with taxes. Sometimes that "freedom for all" can pop up at the most inconvenient times, but pop up it will, because that's what America is about.
1) This is a political blog, designed to vent my rants and raves. Feel free to comment, but any flames toward anyone, especially me, you will be blocked.
2) I am left-leaning. Although I hope to be more centric than I am, (and perhaps this blog can help me achieve that) I make no apologies for my political preferences.
For most of my life, I have been pretty much apolitical. So why start this? My political leanings, if and when I decided to vote, used to be conservative Republican. However, the administration of President George W. Bush, in particular his decision to go to war in Iraq, turned me away from that ideology, perhaps forever. Since then, the more I read what the Republican Party, and conservatives in general, have to say, the more hypocracy I percieve, and the further I go to the left. So this is my self-created forum to fire back at all the irrational comments and articles I read based on my point of view and what I believe America stands for.
I've never held political office, and have not really spent time studying politics, but there are many others "out there" that do not have a political background, either, and take pride in being "just a concerned citizen outside the beltway". But that doesn't stop them from being completely offbase from what I believe America to be. America is not for one particular group, one particular religion, one particular race; America is for EVERYONE! And it stands in opposition to the liberty and freedom that America is when particular groups are not allowed to exercise the rights afforded everyone else, whether you like it or not.
Freedom is one of those things that seems to be different for everyone. No one can have complete, unfettered freedom without impeding on the freedom of someone else. That's why we have laws and rules, and a government to make sure everyone gets the prescribed freedom they are entitled to. Freedom isn't free. Sometimes it's paid for with blood, and sometimes it's paid for with taxes. Sometimes that "freedom for all" can pop up at the most inconvenient times, but pop up it will, because that's what America is about.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)