The Country Is Being Dragged - Kicking And Screaming - To The Left!

Is the government being dragged to the left? It's leaning decidedly to the right in this view. And that lady's sign is truth-telling at its best.

The absolute unwillingness, or refusal, to acknowledge the truth of what is right in front of our collective eyes is astounding, baffling, bewildering and mind-boggling. It gets dangerous when folks act on the belief that up is down, the world is flat, and that in Washington, the left is radical.

The political, governing left is not radical, it's not even remotely progressive. Just ask all those Goldman-Sachs folks appointed to high places. Or Arlen Specter.

That reaction comes after reading a story telling of a new conservative-centric web site - Ricochet - launching soon. Ricochet is designed as an "online conversation that is akin to a conservative cocktail party." That's the goal, to show how the collective right is funny, thoughtful, engaging and doggone it, people like us! http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37189215/ns/politics/

A statement in this article made me roll my eyes. It's attributed to Ricochet honcho Peter Robinson, a former speechwriter for Ronald Reagan (I'm sure he's been employed elsewhere the last couple of decades or so - but maybe this job is the best conservative credential he could produce): "At a time when the country is being dragged to the left by Washington and mainstream media, this is another way to fight back."

That statement beggars belief. America is being dragged to the left?! Conservatives must fight back?!? I can think of four major Obama Administration accomplishments - three with the assent of a allegedly-liberal Democratic majority Congress - that should please every conservative of every stripe. Why fight when you're already winning?

1. Congress mandated that every American purchase a broken private-sector product: health insurance. PURCHASE, as in spend money in a capitalist system, as in turn a profit for a company, as in no money, no service. A very conservative approach – everyone pays, cash on the barrel! Don't dare think about distributing a societal benefit equally, paid for by taxes – that would be left-leaning, wouldn't it?

2. Continuing to spend over $500 billion per year, every year, on the War Department - very liberal move there. Maintaining hundreds of thousands of troops, and hundreds of thousands of private contractors on the taxpayer dime, in an illegal occupation of two foreign countries - if that's a left position, what would the right-wing stand be? Prolonging massive military actions and paying billions to for-profit companies to assist that process - a war to procure resources and a tidy private profit in one package! Which part don't conservatives like?

3. The President has offered an energy bill that advocates more offshore and inland oil drilling, more coal burning, and the construction of new nuclear power plants. And he’s apparently done little to get the Department of Interior to end its incredibly automatic rubber-stamp policy towards extraction industry regulation. Again, moves that most left-leaners have been advocating for years!

4. The President and Congress agree - civil rights are secondary, and the most privacy-invasive laws in American history must be maintained! So the alleged leftist Dems agree with the GOP - the Patriot Act must be extended, domestic surveillance must be maintained, and the government has the right to arrest anyone on the planet, anytime, on executive order alone. Somewhere, in an undisclosed location, Dick Cheney is smiling.

However, this statement from the article is absolutely true:

"In addition, Obama has been in the White House long enough to convince people of the direction he's taking America in..."

That he has. Only folks totally committed to blindered thinking could possibly look at the evidence and maintain that the Obama administration is liberal verging on socialist. (And it works both ways - the president has a lot of unblinking, unthinking supporters, as well.)

Or is this ridiculous position being advocated by those who see a way to gain more power and money by exploiting those who would rather yell than think? So who is funding Ricochet? The fellows quoted in the article are just the faces. Follow the money, and maybe we'll find a cozy relationship with Tea Party funders?

90 Obama Administration Accomplishments In Two Years?

I'm getting tired of this photo, but it has yet to go out of style.

I recently received a list originated by Dr. Robert Watson of Lynn University in November 2009, who has decided the media is overlooking the many "accomplishments" of the Obama Administration. His enumeration of "90 Accomplishments Of The Obama Administration In Two Years" is an interesting resume: a mix of random acts of kindness, some common-sense moves back to the political middle (which is still leaning decisively to the right) and many, many preparations for supposed future actions – studies, evaluations, reviews, plans.

But the next major campaign for President will begin next year, so there’s not much time for these learning sessions to turn into actions. You can see the list here: http://www.tellingthoughts.com/asides/obamas-90-accomplishments-email-list (open up a second tab so you can reference some of the points - no need to reprint the entire entry here).

As Mr. Watson points out, Mr. Obama has undoubtedly been active, but some things on this list are flat wrong.

Policy is one thing, but there has been no change yet to the actual tax code to punish corporate job outsourcing. See how India – a major destination for outsourced jobs – sees the situation (Accomplishment #48, a hint: they aren't worried: http://www.business-standard.com/india/storypage.php?autono=383970). The tax credits for many hybrid car purchasers are largely cut or already gone (#37, http://www.hybridcars.com/federal-incentives.html). Many veterans benefits upgrades started in 2008, (enacted by Congress in 2007), the new law is the Credit Card Reform Act of 2008 (#49, pre-Obama), and how do we know overseas secret prisons are being closed (#27) - weren't they "secret" to begin with? There has been little news since April 2010, when CIA Director Leon Panetta (a former member of British Petroleum's 'special advisory board' for government lobbying) said they were closed - cross-my-heart-and-hope-to-die! But there are some exceptions: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/09/AR2009040902497.html.

For me, the bottom line on President Obama are his most expensive actions: his first two defense budgets have been among the largest in American history, over $660 billion per year. Hope and change? I cannot count expanding both wars (#81) and the military (#61) as “accomplishments.” Troops may be leaving Iraq (#4), but they are rotating to a new front (#81).

Shifting troops from Iraq to an intensified, expanding war in Afghanistan, increasing attacks by drone-piloted weapons in Pakistan, continuing to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on weapons research are some of the President's real accomplishments since his inauguration. The enormous costs of the USA’s aggressive military/industrial/legislative complex - financial, political, social, and spiritual - outweigh nearly every "accomplishment" on Dr. Watson's list. Our government uses our tax dollars for its major export: weapons and war.

Cutting the F-22 warplane funding (#13) and scrapping a missile program (#30) represents $2.15 billion out of a $660 billion military budget (2010) - much ado about relatively nothing. That’s $660 billion for one year – more than half of federal expenditures every year go to the military. More money is spent on the military by the USA - our tax dollars - than the rest of the planet combined!

Keep multiplying that $600 billion figure out for the last ten years and the next twenty, and then ask yourself: is this why we allegedly cannot pay for universal health care, infrastructure improvements, or education upgrades? And then ask why defense issues are seemingly never discussed - a taboo subject - when overheated rhetoric about out-of-control government spending comes spewing out of politicians.

The best part – the President said he would veto the entire defense budget if the suddenly controversial $1.75 billion for the F-22 remained! http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/21/senate.f22/ Seriously? Is that a joke? Cut out social services, cut out regulatory oversight funding, cut out helping kids and seniors, but keep those bombs rolling! How has the President changed that landscape?

On the issues of open government and transparency…well, much like VP Dick Cheney’s closed-door energy meetings, the Obama White House banned public inspection of the guest books during the time that insurance/pharmaceutical companies were visiting the White House to cut their history-making deal. It was only after a Freedom of Information Act request was filed (#8) that the records were opened: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/04/see-the-white-houses-heal_n_277707.html . I guess it's called an "accomplishment" when a taxpayer-funded entity agrees to finally abide by the transparency thing.

On many other open government fronts however, the Obama Administration continues to fight lawsuits aimed at opening up its under-cover operations (#9) – on issues ranging from domestic surveillance/spying to “state secrets” to 9/11 photos to EPA hazard sites and more:
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2009/06/17/transparency/#postid-updateA4.

No time to get into financial sector “reform”, bank bailouts, that crazy "we don't torture, but we reserve the right to" protocol (#28), and the implementation of the planet’s only exclusively-for-profit health care system. Or the assertion that Mr. Obama’s style is encouraging bi-partisanship (really?) and is not heavy-handed (just ask Dem legislators who the White House threatened to ignore in the next election cycle if they failed to vote for the Health Care reform: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/7450237/Barack-Obama-threatens-to-withdraw-support-from-wavering-Democrats.html).

Ninety accomplishments? Dr. Watson's research is a little shaky in places, and his "three cheers for war!" listings don't ring as "accomplishments" for anyone interested in peace, diplomacy and using our country's immense wealth to help people instead of coercing and killing them. By now, even the most ardent Obama supporters must realize that he will not be ending our wars of occupation in the Middle East during his term - as Dr. Watson notes enthusiastically, the opposite is occurring.

Dr. Watson assails the media for biased reporting. The military and continuing promulgation of “state secrets” are just two of the major issues that the media fails to present to the American public about the Obama Administration on a regular, unbiased basis. Ever ask yourself why?

Letters To Washington

Senator Bernie Sanders has introduced both a bill and an amendment that would require an audit of the Federal Reserve - despite its public sounding name, the Fed is a private corporation that has its multiple financial sector hands on the tiller of the America's seriously listing economic ship.

This entity is literally above the law. The Fed is a major government player that cannot be investigated, audited, or subjected to any federal oversight. Ron Paul made taming the Fed a major platform of his GOP presidential campaign. And now Sanders is getting closer to voting on legislation that would take the first steps towards that goal.

Below is the text of a letter I sent to both Colorado senators today:

Senator Bennet/Udall - I ask you to support Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont in his efforts to pass either a bill or an amendment to audit the Federal Reserve (Fed).

If you are serious about financial sector reform, and showing that Congress is representative of the majority of American citizens, this must be your course.

It's painful enough knowing that a private corporation - the Fed -is legally distanced from private citizens and congressional oversight. And that this private corporation is in charge of the nation's money protocols, interest rates, etc., but it does not answer to the people.

No federal entity should be above the investigatory/audit functions of the Congress. Establish this right of the people by voting for whatever measure legalizes oversight of the Fed.

By not voting for this reform, Senator, you confirm your support of big financial corporations at the expense of the citizens of Colorado. How else to explain it?