I wish I would have written this piece (PLEASE READ IT! It's really insightful). Drew Weston, a psychologist who is now teaching at Emory University wrote a post for Huffingtonpost, describing three wings to the modern Republican party.
The first wing, the psychiatric wing, is defined by severe psychological and intellectual impairments, exemplified by the inability to read a birth certificate.
He cites the likes of Sarah Palin who rewrites history or factual information to cover gaffes, (or just don't realize their version of reality is actually just in their heads. Michelle Bachmann is another easy example that he comes up with. Politicians like these would stand no chance in elections if mainstream media types treated elections with greater importance instead of just popularity contests and celebrity reality shows.
The second wing is the corporate wing, also known as the wing-tip wing. Once the home of moderate Republicans such as Bob Dole, this wing used to be slightly to the right of the American center. Its advocates held beliefs now seen as "quaint" by modern-day wing-tips (e.g., that humans evolved the same way other animals did, that a fertilized egg does not hold property rights any more than an omelet does, and that cutting the jobs of hundreds of thousands of teachers, police, and firefighters does not reduce unemployment).
According to Weston, a wing-tip politician holds three principles above all others: 1. when there is a problem, cut taxes for the rich, 2. There's no shame in being bought and paid for by special interest groups like the Chamber of Commerce, Big Oil, Pharma, Wall St, or anyone else out to make a profit at taxpayer expense 3. When not in power, deficits are the worst thing for the government; when in power, deficits do not matter (Pres. George W. Bush). Politicians who belong to this wing include the more 'pragmatic' legislators like Sen. Richard Lugar and Rep. John Boehner. It looks like Sen. Scott Brown is trying to embody this type of philosophy, but bounces back to the psychiatric wing when he's trying to win votes.
And that brings us to the third wing of the Republican Party, the Democrats. Their standard-bearer, President Obama, has proven himself perhaps the strongest potential challenger to Mitt Romney for the Republican nomination if he decides to join the debates, having established his conservative bona fides on a wide range of social and economic issues:
Deporting more immigrants and breaking up more families than George W. Bush (or to put it in more business-friendly language, increasing U.S. "exports" of poorly documented human capital).
Coming out in support of expanded off-shoring drilling just before the BP catastrophe in the Gulf; repeatedly touting production of a mythical substance (seen only, legend has it, by industry executives) as "clean coal" (widely believed to be found in the Fountain of Youth); and calling for the building of more nuclear plants, which the Japanese have shown to be a safe complement to offshore drilling (perhaps with the hope that water contaminated with radioactive materials discharged into the ocean might prove useful as a dispersant for oil).
Extending the "Hyde Amendment" to allow GOP lawmakers to exclude abortion coverage from even private health insurance.
Cutting 120 billion in taxes for the rich while proposing billions in cuts to "entitlements," such as home heating subsidies to people who are poor or elderly.
Making sure the nation's largest banks remained solvent so they could continue to foreclose on the homes of millions of Americans, whose tax dollars supported the multi-million-dollar bonuses of the executives who continue to refuse to renegotiate their mortgages.
Saying virtually nothing as Republican governors and state legislators around the country attack organized labor (e.g., remaining almost entirely mum on the Wisconsin law stripping workers of the right to negotiate their contracts).
But that's just the president. We can't blame the party whose name he never utters for the actions or inactions of its titular leader, who prefers to remain "post-partisan."
I know it's a long quote, but I could not have said it better myself. This complaint that Democrats are beginning to sound like, look like, and act like Republicans is something I've noticed since becoming interested in politics, and I've blogged about before, here, and here. If you've read this far, you should really read the rest. I'm all for progressive politics. We need to hold our elected leaders' feet to the fire, and remind them why we put them there in the first place. TO HELP US GET BACK TO WORK! Not to create a better environment for businesses to reap in record profits and take advantage of the little guy, or to police our social lives and bedrooms. For those interested in progressive coalition building, some good information can be found here.
One day after I posted about literally having a dream about the economic future of the United States, I read this headline on Americablog.com.
"Obama slams government hiring, says private industry should lead"
Obviously intrigued, since this line of thinking is more Republican than Democrat, I clicked on the cited article from Bloomberg. The first statement confirmed to my horror, the idea that government cannot be a main proponent in the creating of jobs.
"Government is not, and should not be, the main engine of job-creation in this country,” Obama said in his weekly address on the radio and Internet. “That’s the role of the private sector.”
In the rest of the article, Obama stated that the role of government was to make sure the working populace of the United States were trained to take the jobs created by the private sector. While I'm in agreement, (and wondering when the US government is going to pick up my full tab for medical school. wink wink, nudge nudge), I disagree that the United States government should not be a major source of stability for the fragile economy. It is common knowledge that we were brought out of the Great Depression by the entry of the United States into World War II. But specifically, it was the spending by the United States government that brought the country out of the Great Depression. Yet, in this same article, it is stated that Obama is in talks with business leaders on how to increase hiring without increasing government spending. The idea of decreasing payroll taxes, which fund social security, has also been kicked around. This is a Democrat who is looking at these solutions? No. I don't believe it. The last time an economic recession of this magnitude occurred, the actual Democrat elected to the presidency created these measures:
•federal assistance for people who had lost their jobs, houses, savings, and livelihoods
•job creation for the unemployed through massive public works projects
•agricultural assistance for troubled farmers
•manufacturing assistance for troubled industries
•stricter banking regulations to prevent bank failures
•creation of the FDIC to protect bank customers’ deposits
•investment in the banking system to free up credit (link)
Almost all of these policies, called the New Deal, have been under attack since Obama became President. While he has actually used all of them at the beginning of his presidency, Republicans have used scare tactics and sometimes outright lies to tried to hold them back, discredit their effectiveness, and keep the economy in its fragile state so they can regain the White House, the Senate and keep the House in the next election; voters almost always go with the other party when the economy is bad.
Obama has tried to be so bipartisan that he is actually starting to look and sound like a Republican in his messaging and policies (yet those on the right still accuse him of being a socialist/communist). I'm very disappointed. Something has got to be done. Any ideas?
Because I wanted to include some music in this post, I think this might be fitting. "Cold Shoulder", by Adele.
I just had a dream that we (as the people of the United States) were making a 4 trillion dollar investment in our future and creating jobs by increasing spending on infrastructure projects and education. How would we pay for it? By going back to Clinton era tax rates, closing corporate tax loopholes, and pushing individual and corporate civic responsibility campaign. Remember the whole, "Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country," and taking care of your neighbor?
Americans who are married to citizens of a different country are able to sponsor their spouses for residency, and ultimately citizenship, if that is what they choose. I have been able to witness the process first-hand (second-hand?), as my sister's husband is from Canada. It is logical and legal way to keep families together. Not all Americans have the opportunity to sponsor their spouses for residency or citizenship. The Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, was pushed through Congress by social conservatives due to fears that Hawaii might be the first place in the modern world, let alone state in the Union that would allow people of the same sex to be united with a marriage contract. It was signed in 1996 by President Clinton, who has since denounced the law. The third article of the act defines the federal recognition of marriage as only between a man and a woman. This is a difficult situation when it comes to citizens of states where marriage equality is a reality. As of this writing, five states and the District of Columbia allow people of the same sex the same rights and responsibilities of marriage as people of the opposite sex. Eleven other states offer civil unions, which are similar to marriage in all but name (in most states). Citizens in a legal marriage cannot sponsor their spouse for residency or citizenship under federal law. These are some of their stories.
There have been several lawsuits challenging DOMA on the third article. Eric Holder, the Attorney General has decided that his department would no longer defend it in court, as he and President Obama both agree that article three is unconstitutional. Unfortunately, the deportations of foreign spouses has not been halted. Please listen to their stories. Let's keep these families together!
