Tag Archives: Politics

Author, Stephen King, had this to say about the Republican Party’s stand on taxing the wealthy. You may read the full article that ran on Daily Beast here.

Here is an excerpt of what King wrote:

Mitt Romney has said in effect, “I’m rich and I don’t apologize for it.” Nobody wants you to, Mitt. What some of us want—those who aren’t blinded by a lot of bullshit persiflage thrown up to mask the idea that rich folks want to keep their damn money—is for you to acknowledge that you couldn’t have made it in America withoutAmerica. That you were fortunate enough to be born in a country where upward mobility is possible (a subject upon which Barack Obama can speak with the authority of experience), but where the channels making such upward mobility possible are being increasingly clogged. That it’s not fair to ask the middle class to assume a disproportionate amount of the tax burden. Not fair? It’s un-fucking-American is what it is. I don’t want you to apologize for being rich; I want you to acknowledge that in America, we all should have to pay our fair share. That our civics classes never taught us that being American means that—sorry, kiddies—you’re on your own. That those who have received much must be obligated to pay—not to give, not to “cut a check and shut up,” in Governor Christie’s words, but to pay—in the same proportion. That’s called stepping up and not whining about it. That’s called patriotism, a word the Tea Partiers love to throw around as long as it doesn’t cost their beloved rich folks any money.

The Dream Lives On

Last night the Democratic National Convention (DNC) paid tribute to my former Senator who passed away in 2009.  During the tribute they listed his many accomplishments, and while all were impressive and admirable, one in particular spoke to me when he was referred to as “The Leader of LGBT Rights”.

I miss my former Senator

Via @Ahizz

Talk to a Republican and you are likely to hear them talk about the virtues of Reagan and Trickle-down economics.

In a nutshell, this theory says the wealth of the richest Americans and businesses  “trickles-down” to the middle and lower class, creating a rising tide. So in theory, to ensure the trickle keeps dripping, one should decrease tax rates on those most able to afford to pay them.  It’s an interesting concept and some money or wealth does indeed get spread through out the economy, but there is a reason it is called “trickle-down” and not “fair flow”… The amount of money that comes back into the economy is so finite that it only trickles; never flows.

if Reagan was so great; lets return to his income tax rates

The wealthiest individuals and corporations spending habits are now global.  Tax shelters and shadow corporations set up outside the US ensure the trickle will never flow or be fair.  I can appreciate and understand why people are skeptical of paying more in taxes to the US Government. I can also understand why people don’t want to pay more. While I’m hardly part of the 1%, I do have a good job and make a decent living but I don’t want to have to pay more in taxes either.

It is precisely because of my experience that I believe if the wealthiest do not pay more in taxes then there is little hope for decreasing our national debt. If I make a decent salary and I find it hard to save for my retirement how can I expect people who make far less than me to save? Do we think that the Baby Boomers in the US will not need medical care or attention? Do we think the world is going to become a safer place devoid of warfare and terrorism? Do we think that we do not have an obligation to care for our poor and less fortunate? These are not the American values I remember being taught, and I believe there is a price to be paid for being lucky enough to live in the United States and have a good job that pays a good wage.

I’ve been mulling over Secretary Rice’s comments from her speech at the Republican National Convention (RNC) earlier this week.  Of all the prime time presenters, it was Condoleezza “Condi” Rice our former Secretary of State under President Bush, whom I was most interested in hearing.  I view her as an intelligent, thoughtful and moderate Republican so I was surprised when she criticized President Obama’s foreign policy. I fully expected criticism on the economy and how that compromises our strength in negotiations with countries like China but her rhetoric was more strident and had less to do with economics.

“…But we can only know that there is no choice, because one of two things will happen if we don’t lead. Either no one will lead and there will be chaos, or someone will fill the vacuum who does not share our values.  My fellow Americans, we do not have a choice.  We cannot be reluctant to lead and you cannot lead from behind.”

Obama’s foreign policy record looks pretty damn good to me

Four years ago the US was embroiled in two land wars in the Middle East and Asia, we were the subject of scorn and the butt of many jokes around the world.  Fast forward to today – both wars are either over or ending, America is well respected by its allies and men like Osama Bin Laden and Muammar Gaddafi are dead. More over, Egypt (the Middle East’s most populous nation) had their first democratic election last year and the days are numbered for Assad (leader of Syria).  Assad’s imminent removal of power could be potentially catastrophic for Iran who will lose their longest standing and best ally in the region.

If there has been a bright spot in the past 4 years for Obama, it has been his foreign policy accomplishments.  In 2008 nobody expected Osama Bin Laden and Muammar Gaddafi would be neutralized under Obama’s watch. Moreover, Obama with the help of Hillary Clinton has deftly repaired our relationship with key trade partners like Brazil, a country that plays an increasingly important role in this hemisphere as a rising economic power and geopolitical ally we can leverage against Chavez.

President Obama sat down and responded to questions on Reddit on Wednesday, proving yet again that his team really are masters of new technology and integrating it into their campaign.

Obama’s “Ask Me Anything” stint on Reddit resulted in nearly 4 million views on the first page of the Q&A and nearly 24,000 comments.   One question he was asked which I think we can all relate to regardless of our opinion of the man was: How do you balance family life and hobbies with, well, being the POTUS?

President Obama’s response: It’s hard – truthfully the main thing other than work is just making sure that I’m spending enough time with michelle and the girls. The big advantage I have is that I live above the store – so I have no commute! So we make sure that when I’m in DC I never miss dinner with them at 6:30 pm – even if I have to go back down to the Oval for work later in the evening. I do work out every morning as well, and try to get a basketball or golf game in on the weekends just to get out of the bubble. Speaking of balance, though, I need to get going so I’m back in DC in time for dinner. But I want to thank everybody at reddit for participating – this is an example of how technology and the internet can empower the sorts of conversations that strengthen our democracy over the long run. AND REMEMBER TO VOTE IN NOVEMBER – if you need to know how to register, go to Gottaregister.com. By the way, if you want to know what I think about this whole reddit experience – NOT BAD

Want to read more from the Reddit session? Link here.

I’ll assume the numbers are accurate since the sources cited are legit.  What an inconvenient truth for Republicans.

On Sunday Republican Congressman Akin who is running to win a Senate Seat from incumbent Sen. Claire McCaskill in Missouri said of pregnancy caused by rape. “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down… But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something: I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be of the rapist, and not attacking the child.”

It is precisely comments like this and the crazy culture that is not only endorsed but often applauded by Republican leaders that leaves me wondering 1) How does this party expect to be more than a regional player moving forward 2) Why is this an issue? The comments come across tone deaf and misogynistic at the least and frightfully fanatical; something one might hear in a theocracy rather than a democracy based on individual liberties and separation of church and state.

It isn’t enough for Republicans to distance themselves.

Normally I overlook these stories but this illustrates the concerns I raised in my post on Saturday, Does Romney’s selection of Ryan signal a change.  We need more political choices – not fewer; that requires the Republican Party to grow up and develop a strong wing that is socially progressive. Reactive political posturing from Republicans trying to distance themselves from Akin’s comments isn’t enough.

My dislike for Governor Mitt Romney is more than obvious to anyone who visits my blog. Having said that, Romney’s selection for his Vice Presidential candidate, Paul Ryan, is a logical choice and a decision he made which I can respect; unlike McCain’s selection four years ago.

I fundamentally disagree with Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan for reasons pertaining to economics and social issues, and I will be using my blog as a platform to express my disagreements in the months to come.

However, when I was younger my mother made us point out positives in any situation and while I loathed this as a kid, I appreciate the lessons it taught me. In honor of Mom, here are a few positives I have gleaned.

– For the first time in a very long time neither of the two candidates appear to be either from the South nor do they appear to be loved by Christian Conservatives. Could this be a sign that the conservative South and right wing religious wackos are losing their influence in the party – I hope so.

– Both are articulate and intelligent men well educated and not prone to saying things like nucular (or however that was suppose to be spelled).

– Romney and Ryan will (hopefully) give voice to the ever quiet conservatives who see politics outside the lens of religion; meaning issues like birth control need not be a leading topic in the campaign.

I would like to see more political choice in this country – not less. To do that the Republican Party needs to build a bigger tent (to borrow a common political metaphor here in the US). The Republican Party needs to have a strong wing that is socially progressive; similar to many of the former Republicans from the Northeast like Chafee & Snowe. It makes no sense to me that the Republican Party is so beholden to religion and legislating “their” morality.

As a gay adult I am infuriated by the way the Republican party speaks to me or in the case of my current US Senator (Scott Brown) — won’t speak to me. I have no interest in seeing the current Republican Party succeed, but I do hope that this frightening party can untie itself from the religious zealots and conspiracy quacks who currently rule the roost.

Is this the ticket that will signify a change so one need not be a Baptist from the South who questions evolution to get atop the ticket? I hope so.