Archive for the ‘Obama Administration’ category

Senator Bernie Sanders Takes to the Floor!

2010/12/07

This you need to see/hear for yourself! Bernie Sanders Floor speech on granting more tax relief to the rich! Keep up the fight, Senator Sanders! He’s making a call to supporters tonight through Democracy For America (DFA)… You can join in at DFA.com 8:00 EST.
http://bit.ly/dSGMDZ
I found the video on Bob West’s blog at BobWest.posterous.com His blog itself is worth a look! Thanks, Bob!

Ongoing Debate… Should Obama call on the Military to Stop the Spill?

2010/05/31

President Obama, Don’t do it!

I’m not worried about you, and know that our troops could help now and during the clean-up…

But I don’t trust the Conservatives who will once again abuse the Government, and blame it all on you for undermining the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 when they “support” our state and local police forces with soldiers!

The first step is to have the civilian population grow accustomed to seeing armed and dangerous soldiers walking the streets… then come the contractor mercenaries! But we’ll be “safe”!

The decision needs to consider the still ongoing debate as to whether the PCA should be repealed, moderated, or strengthened.

I am not one of those who argue that the act should be repealed because the federal government needs the full force of a flexible military to combat terrorism within the territorial United States.

Nor do I believe that the act is obsolete and should be repealed because numerous legislative exemptions have eroded the underlying policy and left the PCA a hollow shell.

I am among those who insist that although there are many exceptions, the Act is essential to bar misuse of the military by Conservative, Right-Wing civilian authorities and to prevent a military dictatorship from assuming control of the nation through use of the armed forces. We know that Darth Vader Cheney was aiming for this!

For me, the Act means only that federal military forces may not be commandeered by civilian authorities for use in active and direct law enforcement as a posse comitatus. If local authorities need military personnel for specialized operations enforcing state laws, it is argued, they may call on the state governor for the assistance of the state National Guard.

For more see: Posse Comitatus Act of 1878

Separation of Buisness and State

2010/05/31

Totally agree! The concept worked for many years regarding the population of the church and the state. If we’re able to successfully to achieve this, it’s time to revisit the separation of the the church and the state again… The Bush and Cheney administration did that one in, too!

However, I would make one friendly amendment: the reinstated separation should be broadened to include business and the state. The state must regulate the economy.

We are all too forgiving and forgetful of all the damage the mad-triad (Bush-Cheney-Rove) has done to our country. While I’m not promoting vengeance in return, I do believe it behooves all Americans to be reminded from time-to-time. It would help to put into context the dissatisfaction and extreme partisanship we’re experiencing as a nation today.

That’s another reason I’m pleased with the administration we have in Washington today. The President, while tackling all of the problems handed him by his predecessor, he has actively encouraged the constructive participation of the populace in local, state and national analysis and action.

And so, if the Coffee Party Movement becomes a place where we can do that, I’m all for it. One of the first task we should undertake as a group is how we can promote a Constitutional Amendment that will force the separation of business and the state so that buisness can no longer unduly influence the latter.

The Other Public Option

2010/03/04

My wife and l often discuss how we don’t understand people’s opposition to the Public Option being utilized for the nation’s health care system, when it has been so successfully used to expand the education of our children.. . Remember the public education system?

Well, someone I respect posted on the topic yesterday in the Nation. Dr. Melissa Harris-Lacewell. I always enjoy reading her articles and watching her discussions with Dr. Maddow on TRMS! Good minds think alike. Melissa Harris-Lacewell is an associate professor of politics and African-American studies at Princeton University, is completing her latest book, Sister Citizen: A Text for Colored Girls Who’ve Considered Politics When Being Strong Isn’t Enough.

Bottom line: Let’s keep pushing forward on the Public Option to increase Health Care for All and increase competition for the Health Insurance Industry. Then it will be time to turn our attention again to public education! There simply is no place for speculative profit in either the health care nor the education of the population in a democracy.

There are many issues we must confront now as a nation; all are urgent! But none are any more important that the public education and public healthcare of our citizen neighbors.

Our other public option
posted by Melissa Harris-Lacewell on 03/03/2010 @ 10:57am
Like most progressives, I support the public option. In this most unlikely moment, it appears that the public option may have a fighting chance. Democrats have managed to secure backing by 34 Senators willing to support a public option in reconciliation. It is still a long haul to get to 50. But for the first time since the 21st century version of massive resistance began, there is some hope that American lawmakers will offer a public insurance plan capable of competing with private insurers.

The public option is the most effective tool to control costs and the most substantive health care reform available in this political environment. But the history of public education offers some cautionary lessons that should temper our enthusiasm and encourage us to move forward thoughtfully as we advocate for a public option.

Up until the 1840s, the American system of education was not unlike the current health care system. It was rigidly localized and available primarily to the wealthy. Efforts to create national mandates for primary education were met with virulent opposition. As in the current health care debate, religiously fueled anxiety about an overreaching government formed the basis of opposition to public education. The greatest resistance to public education was mounted by Southerners who abhorred the idea of taxation, particularly if those taxes supported education for children of the formerly enslaved.

But progressives who understood the critical importance of primary education mounted a 50-year effort to convince Americans that public education for all children was central to the national interest. Reformers argued that a public option and a national mandate were crucial to creating an informed, productive, self-sustaining citizenry.

Many of their arguments mirror those of today’s health care reformers: health care access and health outcomes are marked by wealth and status; the nation’s productivity and economic future are threatened by these health inequalities; only mandates and public options will create enough change to dramatically alter the crisis.

By 1918 all states had passed compulsory elementary education laws. It is now easy to see that the public education system resulting from these 19th century battles was critically important to ensuring that America was a competitive and modern nation in world affairs. Public education dramatically improved literacy, worker productivity, entrepreneurship and social mobility.

But the public option in education also offers important lessons about the likely limits of a public option in health care. From its inception, public education poorly served the needs of girls, African Americans and immigrant children.

In many states the education of girls was not mandated until decades after boys began receiving public education. Even after schools were opened to girls, co-educational classrooms often poorly served their needs. Similarly, the current health care reform proposal extends coverage to millions of Americans while also instituting draconian restrictions on women’s reproductive health coverage, thereby leaving eliminating access to a crucial area of health care for women.

For many decades localities refused public education to immigrant children, especially those who were considered non-white. Today battles continue to rage in America’s urban school systems about accommodating the needs of immigrant children.

Racism and its structural residue has been the greatest barrier to equitable public education. Once the Supreme Court demanded compulsory integration for public schools, many whites simply opted out of the public option.

Economic interests alone could not keep these families in public schools. They were willing to pay to discriminate, paying both property taxes and tuition in order to ensure their children were not marked by the stigma of the public option. Hundreds of urban and Southern public education systems collapsed when denied the robust contributions across a broad and diverse public.

Right now, in Wake County, North Carolina middle class families are enthusiastically resegregating public schools. Evidence that American individualism often finds a way to trump efforts toward the public good.

Rush Limbaugh has been calling health care reform “reparations” and “a civil rights bill.” If Democrats succeed in passing a public option that is marked as inferior or assumed to be racialized then it may be doomed to a second-class status that makes it a poor competitor against private insurers.

We need a public option. As in the case of education, a public option in health care is likely to dramatically improve the lives of those with the fewest advantages and opportunities. Even as we enthusiastically embrace this policy, we need to learn from the continuing shortcomings of our existing public option.

Health Care Reform: Just do it!

2010/02/26

We’ve been waiting for decades, and now the nation can’t wait any longer…
Now is the time for the Administration and Congress to act and get our Health System Reformed.
We all know that this only requires simple majority vote to get the bill signed so that President Obama can sign it into law.
Now many people, many elected officials among them, will tell you otherwise and that a supermajority is required rather than a simple majority.
This is simply not true. Legislation, both major and minor, is often passed by a simple majority. In fact, the process called reconciliation that is used to reconcile bills approved by the House with bills approved by the Senate to prepare the final bill for the President’s signature, requires only simple majority approval for the amendments to be approved and thus included in the final bill. This is the way the Founding Fathers intended our democracy to work, and the way they wrote the Constitution-a of the United States.
Simply put, in the case of the current Health Care Reform situation, the process to process is clear. The House approves the Senate bill, with Amendments. These Amendments are drawn from the already approved House bill to ensure that important provisions from the House bill will be included in final bill. that will be put before the President for his signature. Then the Senate considers their original bill with the Amendments that have been added to it, and approve the final product by simple majority. This then becomes the final bill that is presented to the President for his consideration. If, in his consideration, it is just and Constitution as written he signs it into law. If he choses, he can add a statement, to clarify his understanding of what he is signing.
We’ve heard about this process being called the “Nuclear Option” and “Forcing the bill through by the Democrat majority.” Not only are both of these descriptions wrong, they are lies. In fact, according to the publicity available Congressional Record, simple majority votes have been used, by both Parties, over the years. Since 1980 alone, Simple Majority rules have been used a total of 22 times, 16 times by the Republicans and 8 times by the Democrats.
So, it is time to use normal Congressional procedures to see that this bill finally gets signed into law. Problems will be found with the new Health Care Law; this, too, is normal. These problems can be addressed over time. This is the normal legislative process that some people are referring to as making incremental changes. But the current problems are so great that we must address them through a comprehensive law that corrects them.
That’s how I see it… I, for one, am thankful that we finally have legislators in Washington who have been able and willing to take it on!

The party of NICHE NO!

2010/02/19

Ok… so the rightwing is back… Tell me something I didn’t already know! Actually, many of the best representatives of the conservative movement never went away! And they haven’t given up a moment or an opportunity to remind us all. Too bad!

Now they seem hell-bent on gathering all the radical, fringe groups together so they can all say “No” together… Good luck with that!

You know the small groups I’m talking about: you know, the ones who claim their issue is the one to stand up against… to say “no” to; to say they’re “mad as hell, and not going to take it anymore!”

I like to think of them of people who have “niche” issues that they want addressed, and will say no to all efforts that don’t directly address their niche. All to often, they are so busy saying no, that when a true solution comes their way, they don’t see it!

Well, I say Yes! We’re all in this together as Americans, and together we can solve our national and personal challenges. Yes, we can!

And that’s why I’m a Progressive and not a Conservative… I embrace today as a step forward toward a positive future, rather than trying to hang onto yesterday to conserve the past.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I firmly believe that you must know and understand the past to be able to prepare for the future. However, the it is senseless to try to hang onto the past at the expense of our future; especially when that implies conserving those elements of the past that jeopardize our progress into the future.

Rather, I believe that if we understand our past, both near and far, we can build on those positive elements of the past and take the best advantage of them to build our future, while avoiding the pitfalls and failures of the past.

Nuff said for now…

“How’s that hopey, changy thing working for ya!”

2010/02/08

Better than that dopey, fakey thing Palin is trying to pull over on us!

Who knows what she is beyond her own home-made brand. All I know is that her brand symbolizes the worst this country has produced, ever. Obviously an “empty-suit” airhead.

Whether or not you agree with Obama (I do mostly), you have to admit that it’s nice to have a President who is intelligent, informed and capable of expressing himself well.