The SoapBoxers

I liked Santorum before it was cool. Well, I still don’t know if it’s cool…but I am thankful that I researched my candidates and decided on Santorum while it was still possible to talk to him without having to wait an hour (or two). I met him in December in Carroll, Iowa. I was able to have a discussion with him, introduce him to my Dad and we each got a great picture with him. Now I’ve read reports of people having to wait two hours for a quick picture with him.

Many friends have asked how I feel about Santorum being attacked. It doesn’t bother me at all (well, maybe a little, when it is complete lies). But that means that he’s ahead….and gaining.

Honestly, I believe that Santorum has the best chance to beat Obama in November. Romney may have the money, but remember, it was RomneyCare that was the basis for ObamaCare. Why would the GOP want to put up a candidate who laid the groundwork for the worst Democratic attempt at a Socialist takeover? Doesn’t make sense to me.

And don’t get me started on Newt. I’m not sure how any true Conservative who votes on their values can vote for Newt. Sure, he’s educated. He’s a very smart man. But ethical? Not so much. If he can’t keep his vows to his first wife…his second wife…who is to say he’s going to keep his vows to his voters? When my (very Conservative) Doctor and I were discussing gay marriage, he said, “I think everyone has the right to get married…once,” and I agree. Once. One and done. Hopefully just like Obama. As in “one term and done”.

Obama has already been compared to Carter (a lot). Back in 2007 I had a bumper sticker that read Obama = Carter 2.0 (I didn’t put it on my vehicle, I’m not one of THOSE types). I’m hoping we can continue the Obama/Carter comparisons. As in a real Conservative sends him packing after one term. Now I’m not saying that Santorum = Reagan. That would be GOP blasphemy. But I believe he is the best in the field.

By the way, if you live in a state who has yet to vote in a primary/caucus, please vote for either Santorum, Romney, Paul or Gingrich. It’s great that you’re still in love with Bachmann/Perry/Cain/Huntsman…but your vote won’t matter. None of those four have a chance to face Obama in November. Vote for someone who is still actively campaigning. Otherwise you’re wasting your time and the time of the auditor who has to count the votes.

Image via Wikipedia

Why Syria, why now?

All of last week the various news sources have been banging away at President Obama about his failure to intervene in the violent uprising in Syria.  The regime of Syrian president al-Assad has no defense for slaughtering their own people.  This has been going on for quite a while, so the question is why now?

The Egyptian Example

When the Egyptians rose up against tyranny, the world stood by and let the Egyptians sort out their problems.  This has work well, with no foreign interests mucking up the works.  What ever solution they choose, be it a western style democratic republic or a religious autocracy or another tyranny, is will be their choice.  Many political analysts have criticized this lack of intervention.  They each have their own solution to the problem.  Most of these solutions are clothed in the ideal that they are for the good of the Egyptian people, but with little effort, these solutions are exposed as meeting the agenda of the proposer.

The Libyan Example

In Libya, the Europeans and the United States joined in to supply weapons and provide air support including bombing raids.  There was no perceivable reduction in blood shed compared to Egypt.  In fact, based on population, it could be argued that the blood shed was worse with outside intervention.  As the situation in Libya stands now, it appears that the chosen group has prevailed.  As people who are accused of supporting the old Gaddafi regime are executed, the world will have to figure out if they like the group that they supported.

The Syrian Example

Syria is now in the throws of a civil war.  There have been horrible incidents of blood shed and other atrocities.  There have been calls for the Arab League (a body that Syria is a member) to enforce their rules for the protection of civilian populations from attack.  The League has done little except monitor and document the violations of the basic responsibilities of leadership by the Syrian Government.  The United Nations has been called upon to intervene.  Determining the winners and losers in civil wars is not the prerogative of the UN.  And then there is the drum beat for American intervention.

Taken in context of the other uprisings in the Arab world, intervention by any outside entity would be a mistake.  Adding in the conflicts that America is currently engaged in and the reduction of our military readiness as proposed by the Secretary of Defense, American intervention can only be seen as ridiculous.  If the United States is to act as the police force of the world, the defense budget will have to double not be cut in half.

And then there is Iran

Another topic that has filled the airways is the suggestion that Israel may attack the nuclear facilities of Iran.  There have been many reports about how bad that would be and how America should stop the Israelis.  The main reason is because there may be retaliation by Iran within the boarders of the United States.  There are so many interesting spins in that logic.  First of all, if you back away from the bully because of what he might do, then he has already won and you should just give him your lunch money.  Secondly, the press and the experts have apparently forgotten that Israel and Iran are at war.  They have been since 1967 when Iran declared war on Israel.  No peace treaty or even talks have taken place.  If a state of war exists, what right does the United States have to tell Israel how to prosecute that war?  It is on par with the United States telling England not to bomb Berlin during WWII because there were German operatives in America who could do bad things.

For thirty years, Iran has been trying to get a nuclear bomb.  During those years there have been various efforts to prevent that development by the world community.  When they promised to stop, the sanctions were lifted.  When they threw out the UN inspectors, there were loud complaints.  When they let the inspectors back in and claimed they had made great progress, but only for civilian energy use, the world sighed in relief that they had stopped working on a bomb.  Now, the Iranians are building secure, deep bunkers to build bombs.  The Israelis are rightfully concerned since the current Iranian government has stated that their primary goal is the elimination of Israel.  The rest of the world can laugh that off as rhetoric, but the Israelis have to think about there own preservation.

Image via Wikipedia

This is certainly a busy week for interesting political news. We have Rick Santorum winning the Republican caucuses in Colorado, Missouri, and Minnesota. In California we have Prop 8 being ruled unconstitutional by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. We even have a news story that’s an extremely interesting read; more and more countries are moving away from a United States style of constitution. Yet, I’m not going to cover any of those. I’m going to talk about something that quietly reared its ugly head in the US’s neighbor to the north.

Open your imagination for a bit and picture something many people have pictured before: 24’s Jack Bauer, played by Kiefer Sutherland.  Somewhere there’s a bomb ticking away, set to explode. Jack has one of the suspects in custody and needs to find this bomb before it blows up, possibly killing thousands of innocent civilians. The suspect sits there, hands cuffed behind his back. A fresh welt on his cheek clearly shows he’s taken a hard punch or two in the last minute. Jack pulls out his trusty sidearm, and puts it up against the suspect’s knee, clearly intent on using harsh and violent methods to extract the information he needs to save the day and be the hero.

Too overblown? In the Tom Clancy book The Sum Of All Fears the United States has been the victim of a terrorist nuclear attack, the perpetrators have been caught, and vengeance is being sought. Good-guy hero John Clark gets the evil-doers to ‘fess up by breaking all their fingers, preventing the US from mistakenly nuking the Muslim holy city of Qom located in Iran and making good vibes spread all around. Tom Clancy has been hailed as ultra-realistic, so how can this be unfeasible?

So what does Canada have to do with this? Well, it was revealed this week that the Canadian federal government had directed the CSIS, Canada’s spy agency, to use any and all information – including information derived from torture – when public safety is at stake. I know, I know, some of you are saying to yourself “but this is information that was simply passed on to them, and it could save innocent lives, what’s the big deal?” The big deal is that previously the Canadian government said if there was any indication that intelligence was “tainted” – essentially derived in any way from torture – that intelligence would be discounted. Some of you are still wondering what the big deal is, because The Bad Guys would do anything to hurt us, including lying and torturing, right? The big deal is actually a lot of little deals, including honor.

First and foremost it has been proven on many occaisions that torture is not a reliable method of extracting information. Legitimate bad guys will give false information simply to make the pain stop. Innocent folks will confess to crimes they didn’t commit simply to make the pain stop. Pain has the effect of removing the mind from long-term decisions; if you’re being tortured you do the most expediant thing to make the torture stop. Former Army Interrogator Travis Hall goes even a step further saying that when a person is subject to extreme stress due to torture or the threat of torture, they will have trouble recalling exact information. Do you really want a government’s secret agencies using information that may not be correct over direct intelligence usually obtained through years of hard work? The idea of using any method necessary to save people might be a romantic one, but you’re going to end up flat-out wrong at some point if you attempt to save people based on false information, and then you end up not only not saving people, but you’ve then tortured for no good reason too.

Second, torture is immoral. Part of being a civilized society is not torturing people. Once you start waterboarding, breaking fingers, sleep deprivation, etc, you’ve already lost your civilization. Torture is not part of a zero-sum game, either. Higher stakes do not merit “harsher” methods of interrogation – once you’ve exacted that first amount of deliberate pain with the intention of gaining information you’ve already revealed yourself as so scared that you’ll do “anything” to gain said information. Part of what makes, and made, the United States the best place in the world to live is the fact that we’re better than that. We signed the Geneva Treaties. We decried torture as wrong in World War II when it was used against us. We said it’s wrong, we need our actions to speak louder than our words.

Third, torture breaks the “Golden Rule.” In almost any instance of diplomatic protest the country protesting is stating that the country they’re protesting is doing something that’s just downright wrong. “Hey, we wouldn’t torture your people, you shouldn’t torture ours.” Treat others as you yourself would want to be treated. Devil’s advocate asks, “If we don’t want to torture people, why do we train our soldiers to withstand torture, then?” We also train our soldiers proper protocols for biological, and chemical attacks, but you don’t see us using biological and chemical weapons on people. Part of why Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) works is because we don’t want those same weapons used on us. By using torture at Abu Ghraib and Guantonimo, we have at the very least increased the possibility it will be used on our citizens.

Finally, torture is not only against our own constitution, but also against the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Under the general idea that torture is degrading and usually permanantly damaging, and after witnessing what the Nazis had done to prisoners in World War 2, the nations of the world all came together and signed the UDHR.

Why is the Canada issue a big deal, then? Well, in my first point I noted that information extracted under torture is unreliable. Secondly, if you put torture up against other capital crimes like rape and murder, condoning it is almost as heinous as committing it yourself. It’s a shame that the issue keeps popping up, in part thanks to the glamorization of Jack Bauer getting the job done – despite the US Army’s protests to the image it portrayed. It doesn’t change the fact that torture is not only wrong, immoral, and inhumane, it’s ineffective.

Obama robs Florida McDonald’s at gun point

Obama was recently spotted at a Riviera Beach, Florida McDonald’s. This happened on January 29th, 2012 just after 6:00 am. Barack Obama was seen walking into McDonalds with a chromed semiautomatic handgun displayed. He ordered the employees into an office and ordered them to open the safe. Obama left the restaurant after ordering everyone to stay in the office or he’d kill them. Obama left on foot with nearly $1,000. While this story is true, I left out one detail. The armed robber was actually wearing an Obama mask.

When I read this story I had to laugh just a little at the irony here. It made me wonder if the robber is just a dirt bag thief or was trying to send a message to the American people. I really just chalked him/her up as an idiot thief (because I can’t stand thieves and untrustworthy people). When Kosmo reminded me that I had an article coming up though, I thought about the flip side to that story. What if the thief really was trying to speak to us without words? What would his/her message be?

I believe the message would be one of fiscal nature since the person was stealing money. Obama is also trying to steal our money. Not for his personal financial gain (or is he?) but for the tax coffers of the US Government. Obama is said by some to be a socialist and that really seems true. Build a large government, give the government your money and let the government spend it how it determines best. Remember the Joe the Plumber “event” where the phrase “Spread the wealth around” was coined? That is socialism at its core and in my opinion is nothing short of theft.

I’ve written in the past about Obamacare and what that will do to our taxes. The CBO has told us that the estimates provided don’t make sense; they won’t cover costs and hat it will need to be bailed out by the US People. How does that happen? Taxes need to increase. There probably has been be a time when the government had an excess and they could find that money elsewhere, but that time is NOT now. Charlie Gibson is clearly a liberal reporter and even he understands the issues with this. Why Obama continues to push liberal agendas and tax increases is beyond me. I once had someone tell me that they thought it would be great if everyone would give 100% of their paycheck to the government and then they could let the government provide for them. I have never heard such non-sense and I still don’t understand that thinking today. I don’t understand why anyone would work harder than others, innovate, create, put in long hours and weekends, etc. if they were just going to give all their money to the government. If any of the readers understand this, please explain it to me.

Election News

Romney just won big in Florida taking their 50 votes. We still see Ron Paul and Rick Santorum still going through the motions and trying to win…something. I understand why Newt is still in it, because he may have a chance. Ron Paul and Santorum though…the time has come to hang it up. They stand no chance. I realize that there have only been four “primaries” (quotes due to some being caucuses) but the results and the polls are clear. I would however be interested in knowing if anyone has ever recovered from a similar situation. I suspect that Santorum and Ron Paul will hang on until Super Tuesday (March 6th this year) and then reconsider if their positions haven’t changed. Newt has already indicated that he’s in this for the long haul so we can expect that battle to drag out for quite a while.

True conservatism seems dead.

Squeaky…

The times, they are a changin’ 

Boy, what a difference a month makes. Going into Iowa we were not quite certain how things were going to go. Would Ron “I know I am not going to get the nomination” Paul’s organization and ground game carry him to a victory? Would Mitt “I am the .006%!” Romney be able to surprise with a win in conservative Iowa? Would Newt “Searching for my fourth wife” Gingrich be able to matter again? Or would the late surge by Rick “I want to ban all forms of contraceptive” Santorum’s late surge help im succeed in Iowa. I would include talk about the others still in the race at the time, but Bachmann, Perry and Huntsman were not going to matter going in anyways and they are all out a month later, so who cares.

Anyways, At the end of a long night it was determined that good ole Mittens got the “victory” by a mere eight votes. If only the 50 or so people that voted for Herman Cain no longer in the race had chosen Santorum instead, Romney would have taken the loss. Oh well. The race then rolled into New Hampshire with a yawn and Romney took an easy victory in a pretty much give in for him audience wise. So after two contests Romney took was eyeying the knockout punch in South Carolina.

We headed into the south and suddenly just as it seemed Santorum was fading away in support despite being the new chosen one of the religious right he got a “boost” by Iowa declaring that it was he and not Romn-bot that had won there. Nevermind that the delegates are not really locked into voting that way right now anyways and that there were some missing votes, but hey they are Republicans when have they cared if an election result looked fishy? Romney was on the defense now. Once up 2-0 in the contests so far he was suddenly 1-1 and a big chance he would drop another in the Palmetto State. With Newt pushing all the right buttons of the conservative southerner he came out and handed Mittens a resounding defeat that he was not expecting. So after the first three contests we went from a non incumbent candidate winning the first two races for the first time in history, to a different candidate winning all three first contests for the first time in history.

Florida on the horizon

As the race heads into Florida it has come to a four man race, but by the debate Monday night it is clearly really only a two person race at this point. Santorum is going to be getting the votes he is right now, but will stick around I am sure just in case Newt does his usual and messes up somewhere along the line so he can take the nomination since it is clear that the electorate does not want Romney and now that the field is thinning numbers wise it can become crystal clear. Paul will be there as well and likely picks up some more delegates in those caucus states his movement and ground game can capitalize on, but just as it was going into Iowa it was clear as day he was not going to be nominated, heck he can’t even imagine what it would be like for him to be President. So you have Newt vs. Romney, The serial adulterer versus The unemployed guy who made $45 million over the last two years and paid around 14% in taxes.

I am looking forward to tonight’s debate in Florida.  While I enjoy debates on NBC that try to have the audience act respectful and professional, I really enjoying when it is on CNN and the moderators allow the candidates to interact with the Republican crowd – with the crowd egging them on and the candidates showing the American people the exact message they stand for. The list is getting long and I am sure it is just going to continue to grow. We will see how it goes going into Tuesday, but right now I put Newt as the favorite to take all of Florida’s reduced number of delegates in the first winner take all contest and send Romney’s candidacy into a tailspin.

The day after the last debate we had the State of the Union address. It was a good speech, had some specifics, while I am optomistic after the speech I’ll still wait and see if anything gets done by a Congress bent on not doing anything that could benifit his status. They did vote unanimously today on a border control issue proposed by departing Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, but I do not see anything like that happening on any issue going forth.

Speaking of Giffords departure, it was a quite touching moment, but all I could think was how she is leaving the house with admiration and good will, but the current front leader of the GOP race left there in disgrace. Dammit there I go agreeing with Mittens, oh well that won’t happen on many things, so I guess I am all good.

Bad Nut of the Month

I’ll leave you this month as the race for the person to lose to Obama in November marches on with a very current Bad Nut of the Month. On his trip to Arizona today President Obama was met by Gov. Jan Brewer who invited him to meet with her. He responded by saying that would be fine, but she could depict the meeting accurately this time around.

Brewer evidently took great offense to this as it can be seen that she started to argue and lecture the President, getting in his face and wagging her finger in front of it. While it is kind of trivial on its surface it does represent a greater issue of Brewer and the Republican base in general have no respect at all for this President as a person or the office he holds. And for that, Gov. Jan Brewer you are January 2012’s Bat Nut of the Month!

Today’s article comes to us from Elizabeth West of Graphomaniac.  Elizabeth is a writer who prefers not to get involved in politics but sometimes can’t help it. She is working on a police procedural series, along with a novel about ghost hunters.  Her blog covers writing, work and assorted ranty stuff.   Elizabeth also enjoys chocolate and wasting time on the intertubes. 

While you’re on her site, be sure to check out the first two chapters of her crime novel, Rose’s Hostage.  (What, no direct link?  Nah, dig around on the site until you find it – you might stumble across other interesting content in the process).  OK, time for me to leave the stage.  Elizabeth, take it away!

(Photo courtesy of Jill Barlow photography).

This may sound ranty, but you need to hear it. I’m sick of your crap. You lie, cheat, steal and break the law, and no one holds you accountable. Yet every few years, you stump like crazy for my vote. Why should I bother?

This year, I’m not voting for ANYONE. Yep, you heard me. If you want me to support you (and I’m pretty sure at this point you don’t care), you’re going to have to work a lot harder than you are right now.

Here are six things you can do to get my vote back:

#1-Stop robocalling me

I have to work all day to pay the bills that keep getting higher because you’re in bed with Big Business. If I have to listen to your automated earworm in the evening when I’m tired, we’re through forever.

I get it–robocalls mean you don’t have to pay staffers. But I can’t ask a machine questions about your platform. I can’t opt out, either. Political telemarketing is exempt from Do Not Call.

If you want my vote, don’t bother me with an unsolicited sales pitch.

#2-Shut up with the muckraking and get busy

Good leaders get things done. They know how to delegate so workers pull together for the common good. Your efforts to further your own interests are getting nothing done.

Don’t waste time dissing your opponent, or telling me what you’ll do once you’re elected, or re-elected. I’m from Missouri. Show me.

If you want my vote, shut up and get busy. You’re already in a position to reverse some of the damage you’ve already caused.

#3-Take a pay cut like the rest of us

From the peon’s point of view, there is nothing worse than management who makes workers do things they’re not willing to do themselves. If I have to take a pay cut because of the crappy economy, you should too.

If you want my vote, stop rewarding yourself for sitting on your ass. We’re tired of not seeing our families because we have to work two or three jobs. And I’m tired of driving on cheap bald tires in the snow.

#4-Get religion out of legislature

Whatever happened to separation of church and state? This country may have a Christian majority, but the basic laws that govern how we behave are universally moral, not denominational.

I’m tired of being told my friends who are gay can’t get married “because God says so.” You want to promote marriage and family? Let all adults who love each other marry, and take away tax penalties for people who do.

If you want my vote, stop using God to oppress people and knowledge. Stop trying to force intelligent design into schools. Leave Planned Parenthood alone. They do far more to help low-income women stay healthy than your stupid healthcare reform ever could.

#5-Break up with your corporate bedfellows

Our food supply is tainted. Companies are getting a slap on the wrist instead of someone in charge going to prison for theft, murder, environmental destruction and extortion. Regulatory agencies have no power to protect us anymore.

Give your agencies back the power to punish companies that do us wrong. Make them pay big to clean up their messes.

If you want my vote, quit bending over for Big Business. Your relationship is over. They don’t really care about you; you’re only being used.

#6-Quit cockblocking progress

The Digital Age is here, but we’re going backward because we can’t keep up. We don’t spend money on technological improvements that would make life both easier and better for all. And what the hell is this SOPA / PIPA crap? Do you really think you can censor our content, speech and livelihoods?

If you want my vote, make the Internet a public utility and regulate it. Get rid of backscatter machines at airports and use that money to keep us healthy and upgrade our infrastructure. Kill SOPA and PIPA dead right this minute. Look ahead, not into your wallet.

Dear Politicians, if you can’t do any of these things, you won’t get my vote. And you don’t deserve it.

Sincerely,

Fed Up in America

Hey dedicated Soapboxer readers! Miss me? I know you’re checking the website to see what I have to say about all of the developments in the ever-changing GOP race. Right?

I know it’s not nice to brag, but I totally called it. I should have bought a Powerball ticket on caucus day. I wrote an article for Yahoo! News  on caucus morning with my predictions. Granted it’s taken a few weeks for people to realize I was right, but such is my life. I’m used to it. When I’m right, I’m not humble. Especially when people slammed me for weeks saying that Santorum “had no chance” or “should have dropped out a while ago”. I told a friend that he’d be “eating his words” and he replied “doubt it”. Fork or spoon, buddy. Fork or spoon.

[Editor’s note: this is breaking news this morning.  The official tally gives Santorum the win by 34 votes.]

If you read the article, I was not only correct on the winner of the caucus but I called it ALL THE WAY DOWN THE LINE. Yeah. I’m awesome. Take that Miss Cleo. I also predicted Newt’s ex-wife issues, Romney’s win in New Hampshire and Huntsman’s mistake. Let’s take a look at that fun gaffe!

Where Jon Huntsman Went Wrong (Or Don’t Diss Iowa, Stupid)

The headline sums it up pretty well. If you want to be President of the United States, that means President of ALL of the United States, not just the East Coast. When you diss Iowa, you diss the whole midwest. And if you have a map (and are not Miss America), you’d know that’s a lot of the Country. As soon as he made his corn-Presidents comment, it was game over for Huntsman.

Newt’s Ex-Wife Problem

In my article regarding finishes in the Iowa Caucus, I stated that

Newt Gingrich isn’t conservative enough for Iowans, thus giving him a fourth-place finish. He’s got too many skeletons (and ex-wives) in the closet. He’s a brilliant and smart man, but Iowans believe if you can’t keep an oath to your spouse, what makes us believe you’ll keep an oath to the voters.

I had my husband in tears (from laughter) the other night. I compared Newt’s marital record to someone who is a habitual leaser of cars. You’ve got to trade up to the newer, younger, prettier model every few years…but you’ve got to take it for a test drive first. Am I wrong? I didn’t think so. It should be interesting to see (if the interview does air) what his ex-wife has to say. Forget the Kardashians, Newt should have a reality show titled, “Gettin Down with the Gingriches”. I’d watch it.

Perry is Dropping Out

I’m kind of sad to hear this news. It makes sense, he’s at the bottom of the pack, polling horribly and not getting endorsements. I thought he was a good enough guy, he was just horrible in debates. I think everyone can recall the “Ummm” heard round the world. Granted, W wasn’t the best debater either, but hey, I love me some W. Maybe it’s the accent or the Cowboy I like. Maybe Paula Cole was right, “Where have all the Cowboys gone?” Either way, this one is going back to Texas. Hopefully he’s “saved a pretzel for the gas jets.”

What’s going to happen after South Carolina? Who knows. Maybe I’ll make a prediction soon. I just hope whomever is the GOP candidate they can take out Obama. Keep the goal in mind, fellow Conservatives. OMG. Obama Must Go.

The Worst Form of National Economics, Except All the Others That Have Been Tried

Like Winston Churchill Said …

Let me get this out of the way, I’m not against capitalism. Winston Churchill once said of Democracy that it’s the worst form of government, except all the others that have been tried. Capitalism is the financial equivalent to that form of governance – it’s the worst form of national finance, except all the others that have been tried. I have no problems with capitalism. People should be free to make the money they want, as long as that money making doesn’t harm others. Well, that harming others is where I have a problem with the twisted brand of capitalism that so many modern corporations practice – Vulture Capitalism.

Back in the late 1800’s there was a term used for the leaders of companies so powerful that they were indeed “too big to fail” – Robber Barons. These men were known for using unethical practices to obtain their obscene wealth. They acquired personal wealth at the cost of anything, including in many cases people’s lives. The recession of 2008 also had its roots in corporate entities that were “too big to fail” and the results where a handful of individuals gaining wealth and the vast majority of the country either being stagnant or losing ground. Again, I have zero problem with people becoming rich. I have many problems with people becoming rich because the money elects the politicians and then the politicians make the rules and then the rules favor those with money.

Trickle Down is Now Upside Down

An article just out last week showed that not only is the idea of “Trickle Down” wealth false, things have been the opposite in recent times. Even before taxes of any kind are taken into effect, the rich are still getting richer and everyone else – 99.9% of the country – are either stagnant or losing wealth.

Think of it this way; you’re in a group of 100 people, and you and 98 others all drive mid 1990’s SUVs and make $10 an hour. The last guy drives a Prius and makes $100 an hour. The price of gas for you and the 98 is $3.50 a gallon, but because of the fact he drives a non-guzzler, the guy who drives the Prius only has to pay $2.00 for a gallon of government-subsidized gas. Not only does he have a lot more money to cover his basic expenses, you and the other 98 are at a disadvantage because of government loopholes – loopholes put there by a combination of his money, and money from Toyota and the gas companies. Back before the Prius was invented, and before he was making so much more things were even, but as time goes on the playing field becomes less and less level.

It’s like a very small deviation in a course, over a mile being 1 degree off course will only put you off your final destination by a few dozen feet, but if you extend that trip to a few hundred miles you will be dozens of miles off by the time you get to where you’re going – magnitudes of order. Think that’s bad? What exists between the .4% and the rest of the 99.6% now is many magnitudes of order.

Cheer Up, It Can Only Get Worse!

It will only get worse, too. Every senator and representative makes over twice as much as the average person, easily putting them in the top 2% Unless they specifically vote to freeze their own pay on an annual basis, they get about a 3% “cost of living” raise.  I’m a state government employee and because of “budgetary” reasons I haven’t gotten a cost of living raise in more than a few years. Combine that with the fact that my medical benefits have decreased and gotten more expensive (higher out-of-pocket, higher salary deduction), I’ve actually lost money, comparatively.

For the vast majority of congresspeople, the bulk of donations to their political campaigns come from the ultra-rich or corporations. Why wouldn’t a senator not vote for changes that help the rich? Not only are they helping themselves, they’re most likely helping their kin since inherited wealth is taxed at a much lower rate, sometimes not at all with loopholes and trust funds. Finally, once voted into office a congressperson gets lifetime health care and a retirement check. It’s a revolving door – rich corporations and the top .4% help get people into office, those people in turn pass laws and write loopholes that help the rich corporations get richer and top .4% keep more of their money, who in turn help who they want to be in office get there.

One of the biggest pieces of evidence of this is the Wall Street bailouts. Wall Street started voting in people who would deregulate finance laws, in turn Wall Street was allowed to take bigger gambles with collections of money – money at least in part made up of millions of retirement and savings accounts. Those risks failed, and in failing the richest of the super-rich made money because they hedged their bets. The companies they left sinking were then bailed out by the government, while the vast majority of people got nothing. The rich gambled with our money, lost it, made money themselves on that gamble, and then got the government to bail out the companies they shattered with that gamble.

It’s not just Republicans, on this one, either. After promising to change Washington in his election campaign, Barrack Obama turned around and filled his most important cabinet positions with ex-bankers, and ex-Wall Street types. I’m not sure which is worse, Obama failing like that and still decrying the evils of “Trickle-Down” or the Republicans still trying to get you to believe it works.

Plugging the River-sized Leak with Chewing Gum

Remember Citizens United vs. The Federal Election Commission? I’ve written about it before – it essentially removes limits to anonymous corporate spending in political campaigns. It’s just the latest in a long-line of laws that essentially give a corporation similar rights to that as a person. Even with the millions of people making political donations, corporations can still outspend us, even more so with the whole rich-getting-richer, poor-getting-poorer trend of the last few decades. We need to even the odds, we need to call in a few bulldozers to plug the leak that’s been growing larger since the 1980’s. If corporations have all the benefits of being a person, they need some of the drawbacks. When I see a corporation getting executed in Texas I’ll consider it a decent first step toward the playing field being level.

This is not about class warfare, this is about correcting a wrong that has been snowballing since the early part of last century and snowballing out of control since the 1980’s. That few degrees off course that accumulated under Reagan, Clinton, and the Bushes has us hundreds of miles from where we should be. Democrats are at least arguing that the problem exists, even if they are taking corporate money in one hand while placating you with the other. Republicans are arguing for less regulation, less restrictions on campaign finance, and calling the Democrats placation “class warfare.” It’s hard to have a class war when some 400 people have more resources than 40 million.

Capitalism is wonderful, but thanks to greed it needs oversight, especially when the people making the rules are put in place by the people with the money.

Here we are 5 days into the New Year. I’m still struggling with hangover #1 for the year. This New Year I had the joy of discovering a new scotch. I actually discovered scotch last fall on a business trip, but have been “acquiring” the taste for it. I now have fully bought and paid for that appreciation for scotch. This New Year I appreciated Highland Park 15 year old which every scotch drinker will enjoy.

Politics

Iowa caucus results were Romney #1, Santorum #2 down by a mere 8 votes and then the whack job Ron Paul came in at #3. I understand the votes for Romney and Santorum as they both have qualities that make them electable and they are both on the conservative side of Obama. Ron Paul though? That really causes me to question the rationale of 26,129 Iowa voters. Let me just say…WHACK JOB.

What is going to happen with the GOP?

Romney is an excellent debater and has a great chance of beating Obama. He’s the most liberal of the GOP candidates and conservatives are left feeling funny endorsing Romney with many of the views that he has had. It’s difficult for people to go along with candidates that flip flop. It’s difficult for conservatives to endorse a candidate that has voted against the 2nd amendment, endorse homosexual unions and put through a state health care plan similar to Obamacare. Romney will probably pull more TRUE centrists though. His experience with business/economy and limited time in government is his greatest assets. In a debate, he’ll eat Obama for lunch.

Ron Paul is a serious whack job that will not be strong enough on defense for conservatives. There is no way he can walk away with the Republican candidacy. If Paul were to debate Obama I think he’d struggle. I only hope that Ron Paul doesn’t try a 3rd party run, the only thing he will do is be a spoiler.

Santorum is a core conservative that will excite the conservative base. He’s strong on defense, 2nd amendment rights, Christian values and family. He is not a strong debater and I question if he’ll gain the endorsement of TRUE centrists. I think we’ll see Santorum gain momentum as more caucuses and elections take place. I believe he has a chance of stealing the nomination from Romney although Santorum is the underdog with limited funding compared to Romney. I don’t believe that Santorum’s chances of taking the nomination are great though.

• Gingrich says he’s still in the race, but I don’t think that will last long.
• Cain was my favorite candidate, but has become unelectable after thinking too much with his little head.
• Bachmann has suspended her campaign after disappointing results.
• Perry is going back to Texas to consider his next move.

Other news

In other significant headlines, Iran is threatening to shut down the Strait of Hormuz, a much needed path to ship oil through. The US has an aircraft carrier in the area and Iran went on to threaten that if the aircraft carrier moves into that region, they will attack. My thoughts on this:

1. The military won’t be pushed around by Iran
2. We need to eliminate this need for oil from the Middle East.

Meanwhile, CBS is reporting that $5 gallon gas can be expected this summer due to all the problems happening with Iran. Need more reasons to expand US drilling on and off shore?

Nobama???

How could I neglect to include one of the most earth shattering news stories of the year! A Mexican “Grand Warlock”…pardon me, THE Mexican Grand Warlock (Brujo Mayor) has made a very pleasing prediction for 2012. He has announced that Obama will lose the election this year. I have a few questions that I’d love to run past the Warlock, I wonder if he’s available.

Have a Happy New Year and if I didn’t have the chance to tell you earlier, Merry Christmas!

Squeaky…

It was an interesting night in my home state of Iowa last night.  In the Republican caucus, Mitt Romney eked out an eight vote win over Rick Santorum.  The order of finish was:

1. Romney
2. Santorum
3. Paul
4. Gingrich
5. Perry
6. Bachmann
7. Huntsman
8. Cain

I correctly predicted the 1-6 order of finish yesterday on another site of mine, Donkey and Elephant Show (I didn’t bother including Huntsman and Cain, as it was apparent that they would do very poorly).

Romney, Paul, and Santorum each had more than 20% of the vote and emerge as the front-runners.  Huntsman decided to skip Iowa entirely and focus on New Hampshire.  This ensured him of a poor showing in Iowa, but might endear him to the voters of New Hampshire.

Perry’s going home to think about things and figure out if there is a path forward.  Considering the fact that he made a huge media buy in Iowa and still couldn’t crack the top 4, I’m guessing that there’s not a path forward.

Michele Bachmann seems willing to hang in for a bit longer.  I don’t see how she’s a viable candidate.  She represents a neighboring state (Minnesota) in congress, was born in Iowa, won the Ames Straw poll, spent a ton of time in the state over the past fews months, and despite all these advantages, still managed just 5% of the vote.

Many observers felt that Santorum picked up support from the anybody-but-Romney crowd.  He doesn’t have a lot of money, and it will be interesting to see if he can raise funds to be competitive in other states.  It will also be interesting to see if he can weather the storm of attack ads that is sure to be coming.  He peaked so late in Iowa that he wasn’t the target of many attack ads.

I’m sure that Paul’s third place finish comes as a shock to many of his supporters.  Crunchy had her own predictions on Yahoo yesterday, and one commenter left this doozy of a response (excerpt)

only about 90% of those who post comments and rate them online support Ron Paul. Romney is met with disdain and Santorum, derision. While the demographics are no doubt skewed here towards thinking people as opposed to sheeple, you can’t change 90% into third place without fixing it

Unfortunately, the number of vocal online supporters a candidate has doesn’t necessarily translate into the number of voters they will get.  While it’s important to have devoted followers, they are only one part of the mix.  You also need to get votes from people who silently support a candidate – the silent majority.

What should we expect in New Hampshire?  It’s probably that Romney will pickup a win in his back yard, but it’s possible that Huntsman could pull off  a surprise.  However, if some members of the GOP are unwilling to vote for Romney because he’s a Mormon,  then a protest vote for Hunstman wouldn’t make much sense, since he’s also Mormon. 

If Romney can consistently finish in the top 2 in the next batch of primaries and have his opponents split the time in the other spot, he should be in good shape for the nomination.  A large field works in Romney’s interest, and it splinters the anti-Romney vote in a few directions and makes it harder for any one candidate to surpass his vote total.