Corporations are NOT People

Here's a petition for a constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court decision that made corporations people. If you agree, please sign!   We The People

We are the 99%

The average American is not fooled by the inaccurate rhetoric of those who are trying to marginalize the movement. American citizens aren't drinking the reality-altering cocktails offered by Talking Heads. Read this article by CBS News.

This is what democracy looks like...

I attended the Occupy Salem rally earlier this week. I was struck by the people who participated. I encourage you to look at these photos - this is not a protest of extremists, this is the uprising of the MIDDLE CLASS.

Desperate Middle Class Throngs Outside Governor’s Mansion

As the middle class shrinks in America, the economic plight of the average worker grows more forlorn. Unheard by their legislators, people tonight are struggling up Lincoln Street hill, the weight of economic and political pressures carried on their backs. Their candlelight vigil is a desperate plea to their leader, as they are priced out of health care and homes. Where is the media?

Health Care Reform Might Just Be a GOOD idea

Attached is a thoughtful, well-reasoned article by a Nobel prize-winning economist. It addresses the myths being perpetrated by those opposed to reform, and provides a truthful look at why even the current diluted health care reform bill would benefit America. health care reform article

I am the face of those who will benefit from health care reform, because I am one of the millions of self-employed who finally had to bow out of health care insurance due to the exorbitant premium increases. I am healthy, thank goodness, but what of my fellow Americans who are not so lucky?

The Coffee Party

At long last, an organized and thoughtful gathering of Americans to talk civilly about the issues facing us all. To push our dysfunctional Congress back onto a productive path. To give us a voice.

The Coffee Party was born on Facebook just a few weeks ago, and already boasts over 100,000 fans. People are organizing meetings at coffee houses. This is a gathering of the left, right and middle - all together to talk openly and rationally about politics.

What an amazing concept - people of differing perspectives actually TALKING TO one another rather than SHOUTING AT one another. Join the Party!

Here is a link to a CNN article describing the phenomenon: click here
.

How did we get in this Mess?

How did we get to a place where Congress has ground to a halt, even with a majority presence? Time Magazine online had an interesting article about it. It traces the problem to the polarization of the parties:

In the 1960s and '70s, as liberal Northern Democrats rallied behind civil rights, abortion rights, environmentalism and a more dovish foreign policy, conservative Southern Democrats began drifting into the GOP. And as the Republican Party shifted rightward, its Northern liberals became Democrats. Whereas many members of Congress had once been cross-pressured — forced to balance the demands of a more liberal party and a more conservative region, or vice versa — now party, region and ideology were increasingly aligned. Washington politics became less a game of Rubik's Cube and more a game of shirts vs. skins.

The first shirts-and-skins President was Ronald Reagan, the first truly conservative Republican elected in 50 years. But it was only after Reagan and his GOP successor, George H.W. Bush, left office that congressional Republicans realized they could use political polarization to stymie government — and use government failure to win elections. And with that realization, vicious-circle politics started to become an art form. (full article is available here.)

In the Clinton era and now in the Obama era, the Republicans learned that they can hold power even as a minority by disrupting forward progress and then pointing their fingers at the lack of accomplishment and calling it a Democratic failure. Amazingly, voters buy this twisted logic, which further fuels the vicious circle.

It's up to us to stop the effectiveness of this game. We can put an end to it with our votes. Vote against the party that keeps us in the quagmire - whether it is Republican OR Democrat. Slap their hands and they'll stop playing the game, and hopefully get back to business. Or reward them, and we can watch this ineffective cycle continue as our country becomes weaker and weaker. It really is up to us.

Health Care Reform - Never?

I finally had to cancel my health insurance policy - it was just too expensive for a self-employed person during these recessionary times.

We all know how expensive disease treatment can be. So I will not go in for annual exams or any other preventative screening anymore, because if I were found to have a condition, I would not have adequate resources to seek treatment anyway.

Besides, I would then have a pre-existing condition that would preclude me from ever qualifying for health care. It's quite a predicament for a fifty-plus year old woman to be in.

Luckily, I am the model of health, without any conditions & with perfect 'stats'. But I am as susceptible to getting hit by a truck as the next person.

I am not alone. I number in the tens of millions in this country - people who do not have access to affordable health care.

The United States is the ONLY first world country that does not guarantee health care for their citizens. And the Republicans & Democrats dither about in Congress, caring more for hurting one another than for helping the people they were elected to serve. Shame on them all.

Health Care Reform - FINALLY

We are on the verge of health care reform. The plan just passed by the Senate will extend coverage to millions; it will reduce monthly costs to almost all, especially those who need it the most; it cuts the pork from the current Medicare program while expanding health-promoting benefits; and it will cut the federal deficit by 132 billion over the next decade.

Of course, it will need to be merged with the current House plan, but most are optimistic that this will occur with relative ease. We will likely lose the public option in favor of government oversight of non-profit options run by insurance companies (which raises my eyebrows) but at least it's a start.

Now the recovery can begin in earnest, because the American public will have a future we can all believe in. That's not objective fact (yet), but it is the song in this moderate's heart. And the mournful melody created by the squandering of public trust in years past may finally begin to fade...

I ran across a website called Subversify Magazine. I get the feeling it's a liberal blog, but what caught my attention was a blog post called Conversations with Conservatives. The author did a poll of conservatives, and published his findings. The poll included only 7 people who were willing to respond, so it isn't exactly a representative sampling. Here is the link to the article.

Why am I talking about this blog? I think it's because his observations about the far right largely match my own experiences. I would be interested to hear what other moderates think. Did he capture the essence of the far right in his limited sampling, or have you had experiences that would contradict his generalizations? What do those who identify themselves as members of the conservative right think - did he accurately portray your sentiments? Inquiring minds, you know...

Reach for the World that Ought to Be

Adhering to the law of love has always been the core struggle of human nature. We are fallible. We make mistakes, and fall victim to the temptations of pride, and power, and sometimes evil. Even those of us with the best intentions will at times fail to right the wrongs before us.

But we do not have to think that human nature is perfect for us to still believe that the human condition can be perfected. We do not have to live in an idealized world to still reach for those ideals that will make it a better place. The nonviolence practiced by men like Gandhi and King may not have been practical or possible in every circumstance, but the love that they preached — their faith in human progress — must always be the North Star that guides us on our journey.

For if we lose that faith — if we dismiss it as silly or naive, if we divorce it from the decisions that we make on issues of war and peace — then we lose what is best about humanity. We lose our sense of possibility. We lose our moral compass.

Like generations have before us, we must reject that future. As Dr. King said at this occasion so many years ago:

"I refuse to accept despair as the final response to the ambiguities of history. I refuse to accept the idea that the 'isness' of mans present nature makes him morally incapable of reaching up for the eternal 'oughtness' that forever confronts him."

So let us reach for the world that ought to be — that spark of the divine that still stirs within each of our souls. Somewhere today, in the here and now, a soldier sees he's outgunned but stands firm to keep the peace. Somewhere today, in this world, a young protestor awaits the brutality of her government, but has the courage to march on. Somewhere today, a mother facing punishing poverty still takes the time to teach her child, who believes that a cruel world still has a place for his dreams.

Let us live by their example. We can acknowledge that oppression will always be with us, and still strive for justice. We can admit the intractability of deprivation, and still strive for dignity. We can understand that there will be war, and still strive for peace. We can do that — for that is the story of human progress; that is the hope of all the world; and at this moment of challenge, that must be our work here on Earth.

---President Barack Obama, in his Nobel award speech, 12/10/09

read the full text of his speech here
.

Engagement vs. Indignation

"Let me also say this: The promotion of human rights cannot be about exhortation alone. At times, it must be coupled with painstaking diplomacy. I know that engagement with repressive regimes lacks the satisfying purity of indignation. But I also know that sanctions without outreach — and condemnation without discussion — can carry forward a crippling status quo. No repressive regime can move down a new path unless it has the choice of an open door." Barack Obama, President, in his Nobel award speech of 12/10/09. Read full text here.

This is the moderate path between idealism and pragmatism. Yes, it is right to stand firmly against the violation of human rights, dignity, and hope. But we must always give the violators the choice of a better way. As our president notes, indignation is deeply satisfying, but it does not extend grace to our friends nor to our enemies. It does not change behavior. It does not change the world. Let us always seek to be world changers.

Beautifully Stated

New York senator Diane Savino spoke eloquently on the Marriage Equality Bill before the New York senate. She expresses the feelings of many moderates - click here to view the YouTube video.

A Quote from Olympia Snowe

Snowe has categorized herself as someone who would never leave the Republican party ala Specter. She has some insightful thoughts about the errant trends of her party:

"There is no plausible scenario under which Republicans can grow into a majority while shrinking our ideological confines and continuing to retract into a regional party. Ideological purity is not the ticket back to the promised land of governing majorities — indeed, it was when we began to emphasize social issues to the detriment of some of our basic tenets as a party that we encountered an electoral backlash... We can’t continue to fold our philosophical tent into an umbrella under which only a select few are worthy to stand. Rather, we should view an expansion of diversity within the party as a triumph that will broaden our appeal."

Moderates Rule

Or we would if we realized that we are the largest voting bloc in the country. A recent Washington Post article talks about this: click here. Interesting that the term 'liberal' has become unpopular, while 'progressive' is acceptable as a self-descriptor. Also interesting that when you change the descriptor terms, the polls show an equal split between left & right in this country. Balance is good, so let's support moderate ideas when they arise.

(Like a public option in health care. A nice, middle-of-the-road compromise between single payer & ...well, whatever it is that the conservatives are suggesting. They've gotten so caught up in the rhetoric of attack that I couldn't tell you what they propose. Sad that their vitriol completely camouflages their ideas...)

SO Last Century

The GOP approval rating is the lowest it has been in a decade. (Click here for CBS article.) The Democrats have majority approval, but just barely. No one is happy with with Congress. The people are clearly mandating the new politics by giving the thumbs-down to the old. Will politicians listen, or will they continue to drag down the country by trying to operate under a last-century mindset? If they do, the voters will say bye-bye.

Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize

President Obama won the Nobel Prize for Peace today, less than a year after taking office. It was given in recognition of his fresh vision, one that a few Americans have been loathe to accept ("It's not how we've always DONE it," is the usual refrain) but that has encouraged the rest of the world.

"In less than a year in office, he has transformed the way we look at ourselves and the world we live in and rekindled hope for a world at peace with itself," said IAEA Director General, Mohamad ElBaradei.

I see it as an affirmation of the middle way - the way of political moderates in this country. We have called for balance in both our internal & external politics. Obama shares our vision, and has forged a path that combines idealism with pragmatism.

He has demonstrated to us and to the world that is not weakness to treat others with respect. It is not weakness to listen. It is not weakness to say, "Here we stand. Show us how we can stand together."

His approach is popular with most Americans, despite the shoutings of some whose outdated domination-theory politics brought condemnation from the rest of the world and led us to the brink of ruin. Obama saves us from obsolete 20th century Cold War mentality, and leads us by shaping the politics of the 21st century with its challenges and hope.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy said the award confirms "America's return to the hearts of the people of the world."

America's brightest destiny is to lead the world in prosperity & hope. Obama's vision can lead us down that path, as the Nobel committee has acknowledged. They said he has "created a new climate in international politics." I am proud of my president and proud of my country.

Shame on Both Sides

The Huffington Post is a liberal alternative to the Drudge Report. I've found that reading both gives an interesting perspective on many issues, if I can make it through the rhetoric that both obligatorily throw in to satiate the bias of their target markets.

Columnist Chris Weigant of Huffington Post made a couple of interesting points on Friday.

First, he spoke of the 2016 Olympic bid, and how some Republicans are hooting about our failure to secure the Chicago bid. His comment: "Republicans are looking more and more like they just want Obama to fail -- no matter what he is attempting. This is not exactly the best way to rebuild the party's appeal among suburban moderate voters."

He is so right. Why gloat over something that was an AMERICAN thing, not an Obama thing? 84% of Americans supported the Olympic bid. Perhaps I am naive (and I probably am) but I don't remember politics of the past being merely about attacking at any cost. Besides, I thought one thing I could count on about Republicans was love of the good ol' USA. When did loyalty to political party become more expedient than loyalty to country?

Another thing Weigant talked about was the current Polanski & Letterman scandals. Many are taking a live-and-let-live approach to these cases of child rape and workplace sexual harassment, and Weigant is indignant. He says, "I never thought I'd see the day when a child rapist was actively defended by anyone...and (Letterman) was applauded by a live audience for admitting essentially what was once the textbook definition of sexual harassment -- the Big Boss preying on a lowly assistant."

I have to admit that, at first, I had a lassez-faire attitude. Maybe it's because I used up all my righteous indignation after the mother of all workplace harassment scandals, Clinton in the White House. Bottom line: Clinton was the biggest of all Big Bosses, and he used his position to elicit sexual favors from a young employee, and then LIED about it. I thought the one thing I could count on about Democrats was to uphold the right of employees to a harassment-free workplace. But NOW and other groups either kept silent or supported him. When did it become OK to look the other way for the sake of political expediency?

Again, when did loyalty to the party line become more important than upholding American ideals?

The Verbiage Looks Nice, But...

My article on bill submission (See: What are his Constitutional Duties?) arose out of a Facebook post where I linked to The Obama Plan - a bulleted list of the health care plan proposed by our President. (It's here, if you're interested.)

It's a quick summary that is easy to understand. I posted the link to assist those who complained that President Obama had been vague about his proposal, and to reassure those who have been confused by the scare tactics permeating the internet and the airwaves. (See Health Care Howls for a discussion of this.)

The response to my post graphically illustrated why we have the current confusion-driven uproar over health care reform. The first reply was: The verbiage looks nice ... but ... where, in reality, is it, other than words on that web page? He's not turned in any legislation to Congress.

Not ONE of the responses I received discussed the merits of the Obama Plan. Instead, the conversation was sidetracked onto issues of WHO had actually written the bills currently under consideration, and WHY the president didn't write one, and WHEN would he start doing things the way they've always been done, etc.

It was such a human response. If we can't find fault with the package, let's find fault with the delivery or the messenger or the crack in the sidewalk. Let's run down a rat hole at all costs, to avoid sitting down at the table and confronting our own fears and prejudices. We ALL - left, middle, right - have this tendency, whether we're talking politics or religion or taxes or anything else that might make us lose sleep in the night.

It's an argument born out of fear. But fear prevents informed thinking. An ignorance-driven decision process is no process at all. We must quit fanning the flames of our - and our opponent's - fears. We need to sit down, in compassion and civility, and talk about the ISSUES.

What are his Constitutional duties?

A conservative friend of mine recently expressed dismay that President Obama hasn't submitted his own bills to Congress for consideration, relying instead upon Congress to write bills. He said,

"Every President before him has sent bills to the Hill, including the annual budget. Obama didn't. Granted, there have been years when a President's budget was considered DOA as the Congress was controlled by a contrary party ... but still, they've submitted one."

This brings up a good question: why isn't our President doing it the way it's always been done? And IS this the way it's always been done?

I decided to go back to the Rule Book - the Constitution of the United States of America. I looked up the responsibilities of the President. The Constitution says, "He shall from time to time....recommend to Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient."

It doesn't seem to say that the President should pen detailed bills. It sounds like our founding fathers expected the Executive Branch to propose issues and ideas for the Legislative Branch to consider and flesh out.

It might help to clarify this by looking at the responsibilities of the Congress.

The constitution says, All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States. Among its duties: To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

In other words, legislative powers rest in Congress, not in the Presidency. But wouldn't it be nice if the President made their job easier by writing a bill himself?

I would argue that this is - and has been - a colossal waste of taxpayer money. I do not want the executive branch spending time doing the work of the legislative branch - they have their own Constitutional tasks. Besides, as my friend noted, many former President's bills are dead on arrival. Why would I, as a taxpayer, want man hours (and money) spent on something that has no chance of success?

Doesn't it make more sense for the legislature to write the laws? Our beloved 16th president, Abraham Lincoln, believed this. He agreed with the Whig theory of the presidency, in which it was the responsibility of Congress to write the laws. Our first president, George Washington, wrote no bills. So it appears that 'every President' has NOT submitted detailed bills to Congress - in fact, some were philosophically opposed to the idea.

It is the opinion of this humble moderate that Abraham Lincoln & George Washington are better role models than George Bush & Bill Clinton.

Let each branch of government do their own job, as envisioned by the Constitution.