Comments on the Political Parties

Republicans are trying to say "divided government works better". The problem I have with the Republican approach is what if they win Congress? Will they approve President Obama's Executive Branch appointees without blackmailing him into approving their pork barrel projects? And will our government shut down like it did with President Clinton and the Republican Congress in the 1990s? And how would that effect our nation in the midst of a rocky recovery to the Great Recession? Republicans have often labeled Democrats as "tax-and-spend liberals", but the Democratic Party under President Obama has imposed "pay-as-you-go" rules in Congress, rules which were done away with by the Republican Party when they were in the majority. Under President Bush, Republicans might as well have been called "borrow-and-spend conservatives", what with the huge tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 to the wealthiest Americans and the Medicare prescription drug program, all of which were unfunded liabilities. Combined with the steep drop in tax revenues due to the Great Recession, plus the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the budget surplus President Clinton handed to Bush turned into the record deficits we see today. If John McCain were elected President, he would have seen the same record deficits in 2009 that President Obama faced. The Recovery Act, aka the stimulus, has saved millions of jobs from being lost - teachers, firefighters, and police officers are working today because of it. And construction crews across the country are breaking ground on infrastructure projects that are improving roads and bridges and building high-speed rail. I must also confess that I believe moderates have their opinions heard much more in the Democratic Party than in the Republican Party. The power of moderate Democrats has never been greater; they were decisive in crafting a health insurance reform bill in the Senate without a public insurance option that will save over 150 billion dollars over the next ten years, with projected savings over one trillion dollars in the decade thereafter. And that bill would cover ninety-five percent of Americans and lower health care costs for small businesses; I honestly don't think that such a bill could have emerged without the influence of moderates in the Democratic Party.

The Race Is On: 2010 Midterm Elections

The GOP has now drunk the Kool-Aid. Having elected the first black chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC), the Republican Party is now having to deal with the consequences of a man that is off-message with the Congressional leadership and heavily promoting a book that Michael Steele says is the blueprint for a GOP comeback. Nevermind that Steele has presided over the shrinking of the RNC's finances, to the point where it now trails the Democratic National Committee (DNC) going into the 2010 midterm elections. With the first black President of the United States currently in office, it would be political suicide for them to fire Steele now, which is what many Republicans desperately want to do. It's clear that he is incompetent, and his thin resume should be an indication of his political acumen (Steele served one term as Lieutenant Governor of Maryland and lost a U.S. Senate race against Democrat Ben Cardin in 2006.)*. If that weren't bad enough, the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), the GOP campaign arm in the House, has less money than its Democratic counterpart. And Republican retirements continue to outpace Democratic ones in both the House and Senate. Given that the Democrats are soon to pass health care reform, President Obama will have a big victory with which to move forward on a jobs package, a climate change bill, and immigration reform. What's more, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) was designed to switch into high gear in 2010, just in time for the midterms. No wonder Republicans are trying to play up their chances so much: they have no program or ideas to counter the Democrats, they continue to be less popular than the Democratic Party in every poll, and they have much to fear from tea party candidates running to the right of the Republican establishment in the upcoming primaries. For good or ill, the GOP does not have a lock on the tea party movement, which is inspired by radical conservatism. With the opposition party adrift, the Democrats have had to be the grown ups and run the country. They've done a lot of things that make me mad as hell, so don't think I'm a true-blue liberal. I oppose teachers unions because they stand in the way of education reform in California, and I think that tort reform - done the right way - could help bring down the astronomical cost of doctors' malpractice insurance. And though I don't see eye-to-eye with President Obama on his continuation of Bush's policy of rescuing the financial industry, I think he is a helluva lot better than the alternative. I'll take thoughtful and charismatic over bumbling and stupid any day.

*Compare that to former DNC Chairman Howard Dean, who served eleven years as Governor of Vermont and then ran a highly successful campaign for President in late 2003 by opposing the Iraq War and collecting small contributions given through the Internet; this provided the blueprint to Obama's eventual campaign victory. Dean then promoted a "50 state strategy" during his four years as DNC chairman; the Democrats won majorities in both houses of Congress in 2006 and elected Barack Obama as President and widened their Congressional majority in 2008.

FDR - Part 1

By running for and winning re-election in 1944, Roosevelt ensured that a Democrat would be in the White House until January 20, 1949. Whether it would be him was an open question, considering his declining health (he was secretly suffering from melanoma). Arguably, the Roosevelt Era did not really end until 1968, with the election of Richard Nixon and the Republican adoption of the "Southern Strategy". Up until that point, Democrats had won seven of the past nine Presidential elections; only Roosevelt's Supreme Allied Commander, General Dwight Eisenhower, was able to win election in 1952 (and re-election in 1956). In that period of time (1932-1968) Democrats controlled Congress except for two occasions, both of them the result of low approval ratings for President Truman: 1947-1949 and again from 1953-1955. In the former instance, the Republican takeover of Congress was seen as a precursor of Truman's impending loss to Republican Thomas Dewey in the Presidential election of 1948. Instead Truman narrowly won re-election and Democrats recaptured both houses of Congress. In 1952, President Truman was again suffering from low popularity, this time from the protracted war in Korea. Dwight D. Eisenhower ran for and won the Republican nomination for President (secretly bargaining with California Governor Earl Warren to appoint him to the first Supreme Court seat that opened up in return for his tacit support). Eisenhower and Republicans would go on to win the White House and Congress, the first time since 1932. It would be short-lived. Eisenhower lost both houses of Congress in his first midterms, and while he would go on to win re-election in 1956, he had to contend with House Speaker Sam Rayburn and Senate Majority Leader Lyndon Johnson, two of the most influential Congressional leaders in U.S. history.

R.I.P. Brittany

I've already done a tribute to Bea Arthur this year, and today I found out that Brittany Murphy died. She played the lovable sidekick on "Clueless" and went on to star in "Spun", "8 Mile", and "Girl, Interrupted" among many other movies. She also collaborated with international DJ Paul Oakenfold. Who knew this multi-talented actress could sing too?

More Republican Idiocy

Read this POLITICO Arena: David Mark's response to 'You be the strategist: How might the Dems minimize their loses in 2010 and what might Republicans do to help them?Plus, The Jobs Summit: A little less conversation; A little more action (please? But what sort of action?)'. Also, the interview with Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) is comical, giving his non-response to the questions asked. Instead of giving a thoughtful answer that would provide a positive response or a direction for the Republican Party, he essentially echoes the Republican talking points of "no, no, no" and "everything the Democrats do is bad." He claims that Keynesian stimulus to the economy failed, even though it has saved countless teachers, firefighters, and police officers from being fired by state and local governments. At every road construction site in Bakersfield there is a sign that reads: "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act." Seems like it's working to me...

The Media Tries to Create Another Scandal

So let me get this straight: Montana's senior U.S. Senator Max Baucus, a Democrat, nominates his long-time staffer - whom he recently started dating - for a U.S. Attorney slot in Montana along with five other qualified individuals, and gave no preference as to who should get the job. She was so qualified for the post that she was narrowed down by an independent panel before she took herself out of the running because she and Baucus decided they wanted to live together in Washington. Not only were the two of them separated from their spouses, but Baucus and his estranged wife had split amicably and have decided to divorce after 25 years of marriage. How is this a scandal?

Baucus is being compared to South Carolina's Republican Governor Mark Sanford, who left his state to visit his mistress in Argentina and left everyone in the dark as to his whereabouts, including the state's Lieutenant Governor. "Hiking in the Appalachian trail" has now become a euphemism in the political lexicon for seeing one's mistress. Oh, and South Carolina's First Lady was completely in the dark about his betrayal of their marriage vows. No wonder the South Carolina Legislature has now begun impeachment proceedings against Governor Sanford. Baucus was also compared to Nevada's Republican U.S. Senator John Ensign, who also cheated on his wife. Ensign's betrayal went a bit deeper, though - the woman he cheated on his wife with was married to his chief of staff - a double whammy. And after the scandal went public, it was revealed that Ensign's parents gave a "gift" of tens of thousands of dollars to the couple. This scandal has a chance to mushroom a bit bigger, because Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma - also a Republican - helped Ensign in this tawdry little affair and may have tried to help him hush it up. It should also be noted that Ensign was a member of the Senate Republican leadership before this scandal broke.

Perhaps Baucus shouldn't have nominated his girlfriend for a U.S. Attorney slot, but it's not as though she wasn't qualified. He had a long-running professional relationship with her dating back to 2002, so he had an opportunity to see her work ethic. He is also a longtime U.S. Senator from Montana and presumably chose her because he knew she could do a good job for the people of Montana, which is backed up by the fact that she was one of three people that made it to a narrowed-down list of possible nominees. Seems like the media is desperate to create a "scandal" where there is none, perhaps to balance out their coverage of very real Republican scandals.

My thoughts

Yea though I walk through the shadow of death, I have no fear for thou art with me. Thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me. I love being beaten by you, stripped of my humanity and cast down. The drink is always with you, comforting your conscience as you lay another hand on my mother. And now it is the hand of God that soothes your soul, preventing your sickening presence from poisoning relations with others. Your path seems too easy - four marriages, three divorces, two biological children, two step-children, and one bipolar ex-wife that you chose over your son. I have nothing but contempt for you, and the path that you have chosen. You claim that it is one that God wishes you to follow, but I see through the hypocrisy of your beliefs and realize the shame of your past - a past that you shall never escape. And yet I am a part of you; it is inescapable. I feel the familiar refrains, the same desires, and yet they are diametrically opposed. I am a homosexual, an abomination according to your religious creed. But for me, the touch of a man is as natural as the softness of a woman. We are all human beings, separated by such tiny differences according to our DNA. And yet we allow these differences to divide us, to draw proverbial lines in the sand. What an interesting world we live in...