Republicans

How do we fix Social Security/Medicare and the lack of Health Care for the general public?

jtbutler — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 19:35:52 -0400

September 12th, 2009

Everyone wants to fix the Social Security system, the Medicare system and provide Health Care for the general public. Hello, everyone is going at these issues from the wrong angle. What needs to be introduces is:

1. A law that stops the Senate and House of Reps from drawing such large salaries from the taxes us common folk pay. Yes they should be paid, but come one everyone, Social Security folk will not be getting their normal Cost of Living Increase for the next 2 or so years because the system is failing. But yet members of the Senate and House of Reps will still draw their huge salaries.

2. A law that says that once a Senator or House of Rep retires, the gravy train is done. Right now these people collect their pay for the rest of their lives with not exception. This is not right when we have millions of people that are living in poverty because there are no jobs. This is an issue of no money because the rich keep getting richer and the poor keep getting poorer.

3. A law that says Senators and House of Reps has to pay into the Social Security System and collect the same amount as the rest of us common folk. After all right now they draw their full salary after leaving the job and never were made to pay into the system... How freaking backwards is this?

Well gee wiz, if Senators and House of Reps were forced to pay into the Social Security System and collect from it after they leave their jobs I would think that the Social Security System would be fixed in no time.

As far as Health Care for the General Public goes. I think the major issue is that when you pay for insurance you are covered for your health care. The insurance companies only pay a portion of the bill that is incurred. If you are an uninsured person you pay 100% of the cost of your health care. So dollar for dollar the poor person is getting hit with a full bill. I think that people that are paying cash/from their pocket should be getting the same deal that insurance companies make with Health Care Providers and Doctors. Then at least the poorer folk that are paying 100% would me more able to pay for their health care because they do not have to pay 100% of the bill.

My opinion is that if Elected Officials had to pay into the Social Security System like everyone else (and not be allowed to vote themselves a raise whenever they feel like it) and collect from it for their retirement instead of getting their full salary without ever paying into the system, the Social Security System would be fixed really quickly. Also, if uninsured people were given the same break that Insurance Companies get they would be able to afford Medical Care.

One other point I would like to make. We have lent millions upon millions of dollars to many countries that have never even attempted to pay us back. Why are we still helping these countries and giving to them when they already owe us? If I over borrow from the bank they will not allow me to borrow anymore until I pay it off... So why are we giving money to people whom on the most part do not even like the American People???

Thank you for reading my statements, it would be nice if the American people woke up and started telling the Government what to do instead of them doing whatever they feel like and totally ignoring the issues that face the general population of our great country.

Sincerely,

Joseph Butler

San Antonio, Tx

Which Republicans Approved Torture?

Bob Fertik — Fri, 08 May 2009 11:29:15 -0400

Dick Cheney and his Torture Team are desperately trying to blame Nancy Pelosi for approving torture, even though - or is it because? - they kept her in the dark at the one briefing they gave her on 9/4/02.

But their vicious smear campaign might backfire "Big Time," as Cheney likes to say. That's because of growing evidence it was Republicans - not Democrats - who were told about Torture and approved it, either explicitly or implicitly. As Marcy Wheeler notes:

The first Appropriations briefing took place during the debate on the Detainee Treatment Act, at a time when there were a significant number of Republican-only briefings: two for Fristie [Bill Frist], one for [John] McCain, one for Duncan Hunter, one for Crazy Pete Hoekstra, and the briefing for "Appropriations."

But they on[ly] briefed the Republicans in charge of Defense Appropriations--not the Democrats.

Those Republican Appropriators included Sen. Ted Stevens, Sen. Thad Cochran, and Rep. Bill Young.

So when will reporters ask all these Republicans the tough questions they asked Pelosi on April 23: when did they learn about Torture and what did they do to stop it?

Update 1: Greg Sargent drills down on the "known unknowns" of Pelosi's 9/4/02 briefing:

either one of these things is true:

1) The CIA told Pelosi about the waterboarding of Zubayda. But the agency didn’t specify it in the newly-released docs describing the briefing, even though they’d waterboarded him over 80 times during the previous month, something that surely would have stood out to those recollecting what was said. And the agency didn’t specify the description of such extensive waterboarding, despite specifying the use of waterboarding in descriptions of the briefings elsewhere in the documents.

2) The CIA didn’t tell Pelosi about the use of waterboarding, or didn’t convey the scope of it, and hence didn’t include it in their description of the briefing.

Which seems more likely?

Definitely #2.

Update 2: Rep. Pete Hoekstra's spokesman Jamal Ware waged his own smear campaign against Pelosi today when he told Greg Sargent

“[Hoekstra] has seen documents that would clarify exactly what the Speaker was briefed on,” Ware tells me, “including whether she was briefed on all enhanced interrogation techniques that had been used.”

Asked if those techniques included waterboarding, Ware replied: “Yes.”

Sargent then checked with CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano and paraphrased his response:

None of the notes and memos that the CIA is aware of about the briefing Nancy Pelosi got on torture specified that she’d been briefed on the use of waterboarding...

the notes and memos on the Pelosi meeting that form the basis for the docs didn’t allow them to go that far, meaning that they didn’t specify that she’d been briefed on waterboarding in particular.

So which "documents" was Hoekstra referring to? If Hoekstra knows, he could specifically request their declassification by date, just as Cheney did. But if Hoekstra lied, he should resign immediately.

Update 3: Speaker Pelosi repeated her previous denial that she was told about the prior month's waterboarding of Abu Zubaydah:

I was briefed on interrogation techniques the Administration was considering using in the future. The Administration advised that legal counsel for both the CIA and the Department of Justice had concluded that the techniques were legal.

To End Torture, We Must Restore the Rule of Law

Bob Fertik — Tue, 05 May 2009 14:23:12 -0400

As David Waldman observes, Republicans like John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales believe Torture is essential to "protecting" America. As Gonzales said about the techniques described in the Torture Memos,

They may be necessary in the future. And by disclosing it, means you take them off the table and they can never be used again.

And if Republicans return to power, they will once again bend or break laws so they can Torture again:

the election of Barack Obama alone has not changed torture's legal or constitutional status in this country, and it is at best a temporary respite only from what has admittedly become a staple of the Republican theory of governance. It's not just that torture has become an acceptable tool to Republicans. It's that it is now a tenet of Republican political philosophy that illegal and unconstitutional practices can be sterilized by order of the President.

Is there any way to pass iron-clad laws against Torture? Only if we fully restore the Rule Of Law:

I find myself returning to this one again and again. Whether or not torture is your issue. Or wiretapping. Or indefinite detention. Or signing statements. Or anything, really -- environment, global warming, abortion, health care, taxes, terrorism, the war. No matter what your issue is, at heart, you're dependent on a continuing and consistent respect for the law. Because without it, none of your work on politics and policy is worth anything the moment the White House falls to someone who's not you. You can pass all the environmental laws you like, but if it's accepted as a legitimate tenet of Republican governing philosophy that all of those laws can be safely ignored or otherwise set aside, you'll have gained nothing from your work with a friendly Congress and administration.

And if you can set aside all statutory and constitutional law on something like torture, I'm unsure what barriers you think remain in the way of doing the same on any other issue.

GOP's Five Stages of Dying

Bob Fertik — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 14:53:59 -0400

Here's another way to analyze the bizarre behavior of the GOP: it is slowly working its way through Elizabeth Kübler-Ross's famous 5 Stages of Dying:

Stage
1) Denial	Many in the GOP think the party's only problem is failing to be conservative enough. They said "good riddance" to Arlen Specter and wish Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, and want the few remaining moderate conservative Republicans would join them. Karl Rove, who has absolutely no doubts about GOP prospects, is still their guru. Some (the "Birthers") even refuse to accept the fact that Barack Obama won the election. They continue to battle in court for the original copy of Obama's birth certificate, hoping the courts will declare the Presidency vacant.
2) Anger	Roughly 350,000 Republicans went to tax day teaparties to express their raw, unintelligible anger. A few have grabbed their guns and murdered cops - and themselves.
3) Bargaining	The most influential Republicans (Jeb Bush, John McCain, etc.) are trying to "bargain" with the country that has rejected them through town halls organized by the newly-formed "National Council for a New America."
4) Depression	Bill Kristol has been depressed since Election Day, and he's not getting any better.
5) Acceptance	A very few sane Republicans accept the death of the GOP, including FOX's Shepard Smith and Juan Williams.

Deep Thought - Idiocy Tax

Bob Fertik — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 11:30:32 -0400

We could eliminate the national debt and transform Congress if we adopted an Idiocy Tax: when a Representative says something completely idiotic and fact-inverted, make every constituent pay a $10 tax.

How many times would Michelle Bachmann's constituents pay $10 before replacing her with someone who has a functioning brain?

Republican = Raelian

Bob Fertik — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 11:02:23 -0400

To help the GOP "rebrand" and start anew, Kos designed the "Goposaur":

It's looking back, to the past, refusing to evolve with the times as it longingly dreams of the days when only good, white, god-fearing dinosaurs roamed the earth and those multi-hued and highly evolved mammals weren't taking over the place and turning it into a socialist same-sex utopia with reeducation camps and 100% taxes. It's also ready to "go Galt", which apparently is a euphemism for quitting work and starving to death, thus negating the need for the giant asteroid. Their brains are the size of peanuts, after all.

Great work! But Dinosaurs are facts, which is far more than can be said about Republican "ideas." So here's my Republican "rebranding" - let's call it the Raelian Party:

Raëlians believe that Vorilhon, who is known by the movement as Raël, received special knowledge and instruction for mankind from the creators of life on Earth, human-like extraterrestrials called Elohim whose technology enabled them to appear as "angels" or "gods" in the eyes of ancient people.

And the swastika at the heart of their logo is the heart of their ideology.

Update 1: Since 2004, Republican self-identification has plunged from 30% to 23%. Clearly a growing number of Republicans aren't willing to become Raelians.

This graph details the shift since August 2008. The biggest shift began around March 1, when roughly 20% of Republicans became Independents. That was when all but three Republicans voted for Depression by voting against the Recovery Bill. (Arlen Specter was one of the three, along with Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins.)

Update 2: Howie Klein nails it as always:

The problem the Republicans have is that when they try enlarging the teeny weeny pup tent into something resembling a national party, they wake up to the shrieking and wailing of the Rush Limbaughs and Glenn Becks and Ann Coulters, the Hannitys and O'Reillys and all the kooks and loons who have become the voice of modern Republicanism to the unwashed masses-- the base.

Update 3: David Neiwert has a similar thought:

Monitoring Fox News can take a terrible toll on one's mind. One of the coping mechanisms I've developed is just to think of these as reconnaissance missions to Planet Wingnuttia, which is an entirely different planet in an entirely different dimension than ours.

Fox is just relaying transmissions from this planet, and people who watch it believing they're seeing news from here on dear ole Planet Earth get terribly confused, even deluded. So it's important to monitor these transmissions and help keep the confusion down.

GOP Moderates Choose Obama Over Teabaggers

Bob Fertik — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 08:15:22 -0400

Arlen Specter's switch is the first sign of a real and lasting division between "moderate" Republicans and the conservative movement that elected them and gave them power for a generation.

These "moderate" Republicans are not liberals. Most call themselves "conservatives." Their ranks include Specter, Olympia Snowe, Richard Lugar, Arnold Schwarzenegger. Their spokesmen include David Brooks, David Frum, Daniel Larison, and Michael Smerconish.

They are rich, country club Republicans who like being the Upper Class. They live in wealthy suburbs (or posh urban neighborhoods) to be as far from "the rabble" as they can and to send their kids to mostly-white schools. They support the largest prison establishment in the world for the working class but oppose any form of accountability for Wall Street and Washington. They support imperial wars as long as Other People's Children fight and die.

They supported Richard Nixon, even through Watergate, and Gerald Ford too. They supported Ronald Reagan, even through Iran-Contra. They supported good ol' George and his boy George W, even through Iraq and Katrina.

But they couldn't support Sarah Palin because she was just too ignorant - and defiantly proud of it. They couldn't support Mike Huckabee because he's a fast-talking southern Baptist preacher.

Right now they're having a profound identity crisis. They like Barack Obama because he's smart and flexible - and willing to plant himself firmly between the anti-corporate Pitchforks and the CEO's. They don't like the Teabaggers or their champions - Newt Gingrich, Tom DeLay, Dick Armey, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly.

Pundits like David Frum have the luxury of critiquing this division.

Let’s take this moment to nail some colors to the mast. I submit it is better for conservatives to have 60% sway within a majority party than to have 100% control of a minority party. And until and unless there is an honored place made in the Republican party for people who think like Arlen Specter, we will remain a minority party.

But Republicans who are up for election don't have the luxury of waiting for a conservative-moderate "deal." Because the 2010 campaign is underway, Arlen Specter had to make a choice - whether to stand with the Teabaggers or Obama. As he said this morning, he was not going to let his long career be decided by the Republican primary electorate - the Teabaggers.

It's not clear if other Republican Senators will follow Specter across the aisle. Neither Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, nor Richard Lugar are up in 2010. Judd Gregg and Mel Martinez are retiring. That leaves George Voinovich (OH), Charles Grassley (IA), and Lisa Murkowski (AK).

But it doesn't really matter. The Republican Party will keep shrinking as long as conservatives like Sen. Jim DeMint (SC) insist on ideological purity:

“I would rather have 30 Republicans in the Senate who really believe in principles of limited government, free markets, free people, than to have 60 that don’t have a set of beliefs.”

And he may get his wish because Republicans will losing key elections as long as Barack Obama is President and the Teabaggers go nuts - alienating all remaining Republican moderates.

Deep Thought - Michelle Bachman

Bob Fertik — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 22:41:36 -0400

When there is just 1 Republican left in Congress, it will be Michelle Bachmann.

Deep Thought on Secession

Bob Fertik — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 18:48:05 -0400

United comes before States. (h/t Josh)

Chris Matthews Slams 'Democrat Party' Smear

Bob Fertik — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 19:47:42 -0500

Chris Matthews smacked Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) for using the idiotic rightwing phrase "Democrat Party." Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) tweaked Issa by saying "Republicanistical Party," but it would be much simpler for Democrats (and pundits) to just ask Republicans if they belong to the "Republic Party"?