The Orange County Register (Calif), reports (Nov.1, 2012, News 8) that Romney would do better than Obama at breaking the logjam in Washington. The difference was ten percent. I believe that news reports have revealed that the Tea Party, a right side wing nuts of the GOP party, decided on the political tactic to obstruct, stop any cooperation with the Democrats. What might this suggest of the people participating in the pole? I might suspect stupid.
Any political party in one’s mind is evaluated by many criteria and obviously some are more important than others. If you talk to any individual they typically chose one principal point that they feel most important as an election issue. In this election many people feel that the economy is the most important issue but not all. When you talk to individuals from different ethnic groups you might hear that immigration issues seem more important than the economy. Many women think abortion is a very important issue to them. As one listens to the varied responses from people about what they find important to them, it quickly comes clear that individuals hold different views and tend to elevate some issues as more important than others tied to who they are, where they came from and education level. Let us try a quick experiment. I propose that you spend some time right now and look at a whole list of issues and see if you can detect a pattern. Try to look at many more issues than you currently do. Count on the left hand the Democratic issues that you support and count on your right hand the issues that support the Republican platform. See in the end if you still stick to your favorite or can grasp a few more to support the left or right side.
Abortion: Democrats believe it is a women’s concern and her right to decide. The Republicans think that men should decide women’s issues.
Church State: The correct terms that are important here are freedom FROM religion and SEPARATION of church from the state. Republicans are more prone to rewrite the statements to mean freedom OF religion and religion may be incorporated within government. The Democrats occasionally do not understand the two correct meanings but do not seem to uphold the belief that anyone can hold their own beliefs, follow their religion and not try to instill religion into our political system. Both party operatives know that they must show allegiance to a religion to win votes.
Economy: Democrats favor spending to stimulate the economy when it is needed and when the economy recovers be more concerned about balancing the budget. Republicans do not favor stimulation with tax payer money but austerity at all times and help the economy by helping business survive and grow, or trickle down the benefits to the masses.
Favor which segment of the electorate: Democrats favor and help all segments with special consideration for the middle and lower class. In times of economic distress, they feel that the rich should pay more in taxes so we can create shovel ready jobs to put people to work when unemployment gets bad. Republicans favor the upper class and are in favor of helping small and large businesses grow our way out of a recession. Republicans seem to favor survival of the privileged.
Government size: Democrats find that Federal and state government necessary to offer the maximum equal services to the citizens in areas where business monopolies would not work. Republicans favor diminishing government to save tax money for the rich and have private enterprise take over government services with the profit motive possibly thwarting equal, equitable services.
Military spending: Republicans are in favor of not diminishing military spending even though the US outspends almost all other countries combined. Republicans receive more funds from the military industrial complex than Democrats. Currently, the Democrats want to cut spending as it is a huge budget component. The payment to defense contractors and military leaders has become a special interest pork pile.
Science Republicans shamefully reject science which should be scary for any educator, citizen and society. Democrats embrace science.
Climate Change Republicans reject that climate change is a truth even though the science community has proved it exists and we are heading toward catastrophe. The Democrats are about as bad but not as bad as the Republicans for avoiding this issue and doing anything about it. President Obama has tried to limit dirty energy and support clean energy solutions.
Foreign Affairs, supporting types of foreign governments: Republicans support dictatorships because they can typically be controlled. Democracy in other countries is messy and we can very easily loose control of them and the area they are located. Democrats are a bit better but not by much in this regard. The current administration, has supported the Arab spring when it is most convenient. The Democrats are pretty much the same as the Republicans as they both want the US to politically, economically and militarily control as much of the world as it can.
Just prior to receiving my copy of The Party Is Over. How Republicans Went Crazy, Democrats Became Useless, and the Middle Class Got Shafted by Mike Lofgren, Penguin Publishing. I was having lunch with a friend, I will call Mike. I asked him why the American public fails to change their view of the GOP. Why do vast numbers of Americans still vote Republican? He came back with what I calculate to be a very good answer. He said that individuals want validation. We had talked prior about how individuals held religious and political beliefs that were handed down to them by their parents. We both recognize that beliefs are very hard to change. It seems that once you have a belief, you look for validation that that belief is true.
The next day the book arrived and I started to read it. I was shocked at what the author was telling the reader. I found reading the book was a Oh My God moment. The information in the book read like a history lesson of how we got into this mess, how bad it is, and how it is wrecking our nation. I was, at the same time, somewhat embarrassed that I was reading a validation of my own beliefs. I am always trying to find the truth. I always try to reflect and ask myself, is what I know about this subject really the truth? Was this book just a platform to accommodate a view that might not be correct to just make some money? Is this book a unsubstantiated validation writing? My conclusion is NO! This is the real thing. The author took great care to document many events, drew his conclusions as to what really transpired and then pointed to who was to blame. He mainly blames the GOP but dishes out almost as much blame toward the Democrats.
If you want to be better informed prior to the next election, I really recommend that you read this book. If you want to understand how this county is being mismanaged, I strongly recommend that you read this book.
Following is a very interesting music video. ONLY GOP and Tea Party people may watch this.
 A Political Parody |
| Soloists (In alphabetical order) Christina Saffran Ashford David Burnham David Engel Kim Huber Damon Kirsche Jennifer Shelton Sean Smith |
| Chorus (In alphabetical order) Emma Ashford Matt Ashford Takako Gregg Mason Keane Paula Nichols Keane William Martinez Ali B Olmo Johnny Pastor Bubba Dean Rambo Flora Rubenhold Terri Yates |
| Musical Director Ray Colcord |
| Music Produced by Ray Colcord & Doug Lenier |
| Music Arranged and Orchestrated by Doug Lenier |
| Supervising Copyist Jay Asher |
| Supervising Producer Vocal Contractor/ Choral Director Christina Saffran Ashford |
| Voices Recorded and Music Mixed by Avi Kipper |
| Protools Recordist Eric Astor |
| Video Produced & Edited by Mike Clark CLARK MEDIA PRODUCTIONS |
| Production Associate Bret Hampton Production Assistant Miriam Jacobs |
| Web and Graphic Design by Jenny LaNicca |
| Sketch Art by Vicki Behringer (© 2102 Vicki Behringer) |
| Illustration of President Obama by Derek Mueller (© 2012 Don DeMesquita) |
| Photo Credit: President Obama on Rosa Parks Bus by Pete Souza/The White House |
| Music & Voices Recorded at ENTOURAGE STUDIOS North Hollywood, CA Special thanks to Guy Paonessa |
| One Term More Intro Music & One Term More Tail Credit Music Written and Produced by Ray Colcord (© 2012 Superscore Music, ASCAP) |
| Written and Executive Produced by Don DeMesquita |
While and after reading the Orange County Register, Sunday, August 12, 1012 article by Mark Steyn. Steyn: America turning into Europe? We should be so lucky. I felt that the reporter was making statements that were pretty outrageous. Here is the second portion of my views of this newspaper opinion piece.
Mark Steyn made the following claim.
Obama does not “create” jobs, he creates disabled people: In the same period as 2.6 million Americans signed on with new employers, 3.1 million signed on at Social Security Disability Office.
I am trying to understand how the president of the United States creates disabled people. Mr. Steyn then goes on to add the following.
Obama is the first president in history to create more disabled people than workers.
Yup. He said it twice in his newspaper article. I quite frankly find it rather difficult to respond to such a outlandish view. I feel somewhat foolish even trying to figure out how anyone can create a disabled person. If Mr. Steyn has any proof that this is happening, I expect him to report this to the police.
While and after reading the Orange County Register, Sunday, August 12, 1012 article by Mark Steyn. Steyn: America turning into Europe? We should be so lucky. I felt that the reporter was making statements that went counter to my own readings. I decided to checking upon some of the “facts” in the article.
Following is an article quote:
Obama has added $5 trillion to the national debt, and has nothing to show for it.
There are two statements within this sentence. Let us examine each separately.
It may seem that Mr. Steyn wants to paint the Democrats as a spending party. The opposite may be the truth. Wikipedia states the following:
Economist Mike Kimel notes that the five former Democratic Presidents (Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Lyndon B. Johnson, John F. Kennedy, and Harry S. Truman) all reduced public debt as a share of GDP, while the last four Republican Presidents (George W. Bush, George H. W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, and Gerald Ford) all oversaw an increase in the country’s indebtedness.
I degrees by including former presidents. Let us look at Obama. In the same Wikipedia article it states that as of 2009
$9 trillion in deficits forecast for the 2010–2019 period, $5 trillion are due to programs from the prior administration (President Bush), including tax cuts from 2001 and 2003 and the unfunded Medicare Part D. Another $3.5 trillion are due to the financial crisis, including reductions in future tax revenues and additional spending for the social safety net such as unemployment benefits. The remainder are stimulus and bailout programs related to the crisis.
In this article it states that a statistical “swing” occurred from expected forecast budget surplus in 2001 to a $2 trillion deficit by 2011. This surprise was due to the following factors:
Revenue declines due to the recession, separate from the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003: 28%
Defense spending increases: 15%
Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003: 13%
Increases in net interest: 11%
Other non-defense spending: 10%
Other tax cuts: 8%
Obama Stimulus: 6%
Medicare Part D: 2%
Other reasons: 7%
Wikipedia seemed to add the “swing” factor because the US Government did not see the train wreck coming, financial crisis that morphed into a recession, and who could blame them. Note that the financial train wreck needed to be cleaned up. The Republicans want to paint Obama as spending his way out of this recession. Can you think of any other productive method that gets fast results? Look at the numbers above. The Bush tax cuts helped to increase the deficit more than double what Obama has spent on the stimulus! This may be why the Democrats want the wealthy to pay their share and thus gain a sizable deficit reduction.
Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_public_debt
About.com:
By most economic indicators, the Economic Stimulus Package was a success. In March 2009, before it was launched, Q1 GDP was -6.4% (it has since been revised to -4.9%)and the Dow had slid to 6,500. By Q4 2009, GDP was +5% and the Dow had risen to 10,428. Not all of that success can be attributed to the Stimulus Package, since expansive monetary policy and strong emerging markets also helped boost the economy. However, those were all in place in March 2009. No doubt, the economic stimulus package inspired the confidence needed turn the economy around.
http://useconomy.about.com/od/candidatesandtheeconomy/a/Obama_Stimulus.htm
LA Times article uncovered a rather unknown aspect of using the stimulus spending to reform Washington. Instead of across the board hand outs Obama specified competition-based, peer review, results-oriented grant programs.
Obama’s stimulus did begin to usher in a new era of rationality through competition, in which you had to do more than just check the right boxes and extend your hand to qualify for a federal check.
The Fiscal Times.com (TFT) Obama’s Stimulus Plan: What Worked, What Didn’t.
In a wonderful interview with Michael Grabell concerning his book “Money Well Spent?: The Truth Behind the Trillion-Dollar-Stimulus, the Biggest Economic Recovery Plan in History.
An incorrect assumption is that the stimulus package just filled potholes and didn’t create any lasting legacy. There are some very big projects we’ll be able to look back on 75 years from now and say, that was because of the stimulus. The Fourth Bore, the Caldecott Tunnel in Oakland in its suburbs, the Cleveland Interbelt Bridge got $79 million to replace this 50-year-old bridge in downtown Cleveland, and South Dakota is building a tribal school for the Sioux tribe’s Crow Creek reservation. In New York, Moynihan Station, the Second Avenue subway, Staten Island’s ferry terminal, the Fulton Street transit center – there are big projects that got a significant chunk of money and now can go forward in a bigger way.
Note that we just checked on the “facts” within a wide circulated newspaper in Orange County California of a single opinion piece by a single reporter. The “facts” allegedly appear to be slanted as pro GOP. Orange County has a reputation of being heavily GOP voters. I have noted that the Wall Street Journal editorial page, in my opinion, is pro GOP. The Orange County Register is Libertarian, thus expect slant opinions. Might we draw from this small example that some sources of our news opinion sections are pander platforms? The extended problem for all of us is where can we go for good solid reporting of the news and information? Should opinion pieces allow for individuals to make up “facts’? I can understand different people coming up with different viewpoints and is not that the intent of the opinion section of a newspaper? Just make sure your arguments are based on fact that has some solid basis. The Wall Street Journal allegedly is no different, in my opinion, in publishing error riddled opinions. Newspapers are loosing readership. Could this be party due to their flawed product?