Category: politics

A perfect example of why I am not a huge fan of the GOP

Before you get any ideas about this, read what I write, before you pass judgement.

But first, the story:

LANSING — Gov. Rick Snyder has added his voice to the chorus of criticism directed at Republican National Committeeman Dave Agema over his latest antigay remarks.

Agema, in a speech at a Republican meeting in Berrien County on Thursday, said that gay people manipulate the system to get free health insurance because they are dying from AIDS at a young age.

Agema cited his experience as a pilot with American Airlines, according to a transcript of his remarks published by the Herald-Palladium of St. Joseph and Benton Harbor.

“I’m a flight attendant,” Agema said. “You have AIDS. You come to me and say, ‘Hey, tell them I’m your lover for the last six months.’ You get on our health care.

“American Airlines spends $400,000 before you die of AIDS. And he goes on to the next, and the next, and that’s what was happening.

“Folks, they want free medical because they’re dying between 38 and 44 years old. It’s a biggie. So, to me it’s a moral issue. It’s a biblical issue. Traditional marriage is where it should be and that is in our platform, so people that are opposed on that issue within our party are wrong.”

Media reports about Agema’s comments brought a storm of criticism and calls for Agema’s resignation. Last March, Agema came under fire for approvingly posting on Facebook an article that said gay people were sexually promiscuous, rife with sexually transmitted diseases and responsible for “half the murders in large cities.”

Snyder condemns such remarks as “extreme and discriminatory,” Snyder spokeswoman Sara Wurfel told the Free Press this morning.

via Gov. Snyder: Dave Agema’s antigay remarks ‘extreme and discriminatory’  – Detroit Free Press 

Okay, first off; Since when did the GOP became the political party that coddles homosexuals? Second of all, I was under the impression that the Republican Party was the party of moral Christian values.  At least they were back in the 1980’s, when Reagan was in office. The truth is, if it had not been for the Christian Right in America; Reagan would have never been elected at all. The problem is that the Republican Party establishment is now really pushing the Christian Right out of the party, in favor of an fiscal, Libertarian, Secularist forum of Conservatism. I can tell you this, if they continue to do this; the Republican Party will never win another election.

Do not get me wrong here, I am not in favor of a Christian version of Sharia law or anything silly like that; but good grief, can the Republican Party at least stand for something other than being the party of no? Are we that far gone as a society that even the party that supposedly believes in Conservative values, now is hostile to anyone, who happens to express any sort of Conservative Christian values?

As for the man’s comments, were they offensive? To a homosexual, yes, they were. But, that is the point! Christian moral values are always offensive to those who partake in immorality. Yes, Homosexuality is immoral. The Bible plainly says this in the Old and New Testaments.

It galls me that Snyder and his political correct friends in the GOP have taken this sort of cowardly stand against someone, who dares to speak his convictions against something that Biblically, is considered an abomination to the living God. Shame on Snyder and may he lose his reelection bid. I voted for the idiot; and first he stabbed my Father in the back, and now, he is stabbing the Christian Right in the back. For this, he should not be reelected.

 

Interesting Obamacare story

Yeah, I know, I said I was burning out. But, this one is pretty good.

In the short term, I am the kind of person for whom the Obamacare mandate is a pain in the neck. My husband and I, both writers, have been buying health insurance on the individual market for several years, paying about a thousand dollars a month for a policy that covers us and our two children. We were among those Americans who liked our policy: we had to choose doctors from within a network, but there were plenty to choose from, including the pediatrician we’d gone to since our kids, now teen-agers, were born. We had no deductible and a reasonable cap on out-of-pocket expenses: five thousand dollars a year. We were less happy when, in early October, our insurer, CareFirst Blue Cross, raised our monthly premium by three hundred dollars with no explanation. (The only health expenses we’d incurred in the previous year were for the annual checkups that the schools required for the kids.) This was a big increase for us, especially since our writing income tends to fluctuate from month to month and year to year. Then, like many of the twelve million or so Americans who buy their own insurance, we received a letter from CareFirst in late October saying that our policy would be cancelled, because it didn’t conform to Affordable Care Act requirements. I did what I usually do in these circumstances: I procrastinated.

via My Cancelled Policy, and My Values : The New Yorker.

It’s a good read, go check it out. I will say this, like I wrote in my previous posting: The Democrats wanted this, and they got it; and because of this, I really do not believe that any of the Democrats or anyone who voted for Obama, have a legit reason to complain. They brought the lies of the Obama campaign, and White House. So, they should really just shut up.

 

Chuck Schumer on Wall Street and Left & Right Wing Blogs

I found these two quotes to be interesting, they’re from an interview in The New Republic:

IC: You and Mayor Bloomberg, in 2007, said that reregulating Wall Street would cause people to flee overseas to London. That is very different than Warren.

CS: It has got to be, to me, a careful balance, OK? Wall Street excesses helped lead to the Great Recession. And to sit there and do nothing, or do what the Republicans want—repeal Dodd-Frank—makes no sense. But on the other hand, I think that you just don’t attack Wall Street because they’re successful or rich.

I just unsuccessfully, with Bloomberg, supported raising the building height in midtown Manhattan, so we could build more office buildings. Office buildings are our factories—imagine the people of Michigan saying, “We don’t want to build a new auto factory, because the Ford family will get richer, or the person who builds the factory will make money.” You’ve got to look at the effect on average folks. The vast majority of the people employed by Wall Street are the secretary who goes in to work on the Long Island Rail Road, who makes fifty, sixty, seventy thousand dollars a year. I’m not saying Elizabeth does this, but there are some on the far left who just have a visceral hatred of Wall Street. It’s counterproductive.

IC: You don’t think Elizabeth Warren makes a villain out of Wall Street?

CS: I am just going to leave it at what I said.

Okay, I get this, he is an anti-populist, most mainline establishment Democrats are. This is because they get most of their funding from big businesses, believe it or not. Warren is a fluke and what I would call a liberal version of a Tea Partier. Grassroots and all that.

However, this quote here really made me wonder:

IC: Forget Warren then. Is this a problem for your party?

CS: You don’t want to go after them for the sake of going after them. The left-wing blogs want you to be completely and always anti–Wall Street. It’s not the right way to be.

IC: So are the left-wing blogs as bad as the Tea Party ones in this case?

CS: Left-wing blogs are the mirror image. They just have less credibility and less clout.

We do? That is news to me. I have not had anyone from the Republican Party contact me at all. Of course, I am a Paleoconservative and a good majority of the Republican Party is pretty much Neoconservative; but I digress. I think Schumer might be overstating that one a bit. I can tell you this; if Schumer is saying that the right-wing blogs are taking marching orders from the RNC, then he is very highly mistaken. Anyone who reads the blogs on the right knows that the grassroots/tea party crowd, which does make up a good amount of the Blogosphere; is not very happy with the RNC at all.

So, this idea that the right-wing blogs have some sort of special inside clout with the party, I believe, is a mistaken assumption on Schumer’s part.

Others: Post Politics, Mock Paper Scissors, Daily Kos, Shakesville, Talking Points Memo, Outside the Beltway, No More Mister Nice Blog, The Dish, Althouse. (Via Memeornadum)

My feelings on this Iranian deal

As you all know, there is a new agreement between the rest of the world and Iran now.

There is also a good deal of partisan and racial hand wringing on the right. Especially among the neoconservative Jewish right. 🙄 Not to mention Israel’s leadership, who are almost quite literally bouncing off the walls. To be fair about it; so are the Saudis. To get a good feel for just how bad the wall bouncing is; go have a look at the round-up of neoconservative and otherwise bloggers at Memeorandum.

A good place for a non-biased and non-partisan look at the details is found at Business Insider.

Here is my official take on the Iranian deal:

Some are calling this a huge blunder. I am not so sure about how much of a “blunder” it might be. But, rather an interesting move by the Obama Administration. They have actually been able to do something that no other presidential Administration has been able to do. They actually have gotten Iran to agree to a formal written agreement on nukes and nuke enrichment.

The upside to this: The Iranians will be able to pursue nuclear energy and will be able to power their Country; that is provided they stick to the terms of the agreement. Which is great, provided they actually do this. I would like to think that they would do such a thing.

However, I am a realist; and I also happen to know Iran’s track record on telling the truth, since the time that the Shah was deposed.

Here is the downside and yes, there is always one of those:

The downside to this agreement is this; if the Iranians renege on this agreement and the US and other Country tear up this agreement, then we are going to have another problem. Iran will be considered an unstable rogue nation and then, the war drums towards Iran will be begin beating in earnest on both sides of the aisle. As it is now, the neoconservative hawks in the Republican Party want to go war with the Iranians so bad that they can taste it. If Iran welches on the agreement; then both sides are going to have the argument that Iran’s leadership must be toppled and the war must happen.

I am not so sure that such a thing would even happen under Obama’s watch, as he does want to be seen as the President that tried to reach out to the Iranians with a fig leaf. However the next President would have to come in and deal with a situation as such. If the deal is reneged on; the war hawks would have their piece of leverage that they would really need to make the case for war.

To be fair, I have seen skepticism in both parties; and that is a good thing. I think that blindly trusting Iran is a futile mistake. However, I believe that Iran has just been given their own fair shot. If Iranians play their cards right, we might be seeing a new era. However, the skeptic in me thinks that the US and the major Nations have just baited a trap of war for the Iranians and they were actually foolish enough to walk right into it. For the sake of the future of this Nation and the World, I hope like the devil that I am wrong. However, knowing things like I do; I sadly believe that I am not.

Me and Sen. Carl Levin are on the same wavelength!

Which is pretty scary, considering he is a Democrat and I am a paleoconservative.

In a previous posting I wrote:

Not only that; what happens if the Democrats lose the majority in both houses of Congress? Then, the Republicans will use that relaxed power to stack the courts with people who, of course, the Democratswill not like and then you would have state Christian statism in a horrible form; and you have to know the Democrats will not like that one bit. Now, if I were a partisan type, I would think this would be awesome. However, I believe in divided Government and I happen to believe that one party acts as a check and balance to the other. It keeps one party from holding a monopoly on Government.

Take it away Senator Levin:

But Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, one of three Democrats who voted against diluting the filibuster, noted that past Democratic minorities have used the procedure to block GOP moves to limit abortion rights and repeal the estate tax.

He said he feared that a future Senate majority would weaken filibusters against legislation and “down the road, the hard-won protections and benefits for our people’s health and welfare will be lost.”

This is because that Senator Levin is from the old school Democratic Party and he happens to know a little about the game. Also, unlike some of the other Democrats; Levin is looking down the road, past 2014 and 2016, when the Democrats might actually lose the majority in both houses, due to the Obama Administration’s failures —- and he sees the Republicans abusing this little change in the rules to the high heavens.

Another reason too, is because he is not running for reelection. This is because of the stupidity, like this, up on the hill. The Parties have become too divided; and the partisan rancour has become too ugly. Levin comes from the old school Democratic Party and he sees the future, this is why he is getting out of it. Which is a smart move in this paleoconservative writers opinion.

Kudos to Senator Levin for having the guts to call a spade for what it truly is; a massive blunder by the Senate Democrats.

An FYI on the Beast and Don Fallon

I happen to be reading over at Breitbart.com and I happened to notice an article about Politico.com hiring a writer from that magazine the beast.

Well, I happen to have a bit of experience with that magazine called the Beast, and I happen to know a little something about the owner. If you’ll please click here you can read all about it.

Now some of you would probably say “what about you?” I have been more abundantly clear that my issues with the Zionism movement are strictly religious and political. I am NOT a Jew hater and Paul Fallon and his crew from The Beast are definitely Jew haters.

I just thought I’d let everyone know about that. And I find it very shocking that Politico would even hire someone like that.

If Harry Reid goes with the nuclear option, the Dems will be finished

That’s right folks, if Harry Reid is serious about pulling an overreach of this magnitude; the Democrats will face a setback that would last a very long time.

The Story:

Senator Harry Reid appears set to go nuclear — before Thanksgiving.

With Senate Republicans blocking a third Obama nomination to the powerful D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, a senior Senate Democratic leadership aide tells me Reid is now all but certain to move to change the Senate rules by simple majority — doing away with the filibuster on executive and judicial nominations, with the exception of the Supreme Court – as early as this week.

At a presser today, Reid told reporters he was taking another look at rules reform, but didn’t give a timeline. The senior leadership aide goes further, saying it’s hard to envision circumstances under which Reid doesn’t act.

“Reid has become personally invested in the idea that Dems have no choice other than to change the rules if the Senate is going to remain a viable and functioning institution,” the aide says. That’s a long journey from where Reid was only 10 months ago, when he agreed to a toothless filibuster reform deal out of a real reluctance to change the rules by simple majority. Asked to explain the evolution, the aide said: “It’s been a long process. But this is the only thing we can do to keep the Senate performing its basic duties.”

Asked if Reid would drop the threat to go nuclear if Republicans green-lighted one or two of Obama’s judicial nominations, the aide said: “I don’t think that’s going to fly.”

via Harry Reid is set to go nuclear. – Greg Sargent / The Plum Line

Well, I can tell you this; if Reid thinks that this “will fly” with the American people, he is wrong and the Democrats will pay the price for this one. If you think that the Republican Party will not exploit this little boneheaded move for political purposes; you are crazy. This will be seen by many as a power grab by the Conservative movement; and they will use it against the Democrats in 2014 and 2016.

Not only that; what happens if the Democrats lose the majority in both houses of Congress? Then, the Republicans will use that relaxed power to stack the courts with people who, of course, the Democrats will not like and then you would have state Christian statism in a horrible form; and you have to know the Democrats will not like that one bit. Now, if I were a partisan type, I would think this would be awesome. However, I believe in divided Government and I happen to believe that one party acts as a check and balance to the other. It keeps one party from holding a monopoly on Government.

It all goes back to that airplane analogy that I like to use: If a plane flies in circles; whether clockwise or counterclockwise, it does not really go anywhere and sooner or later, it will crash. However, if that same plane flies level, it always gets where it is going.  The same goes for the Government; a Government that is controlled by one party, is doomed to failure and will eventually crash. However, a Nation with divided Government always gets where it is going.

Hopefully, Harry Reid has more sense than to pull a stunt like this one.

Others, mostly Democrats; your mileage may vary: The Moderate Voice, Talking Points Memo, PoliticusUSA, Booman Tribune, Balloon Juice,Lawyers, Guns & Money, A plain blog about politics, Daily Kos, National Review, The Reality-Based Community and Hullabaloo (Via Memeorandum)

From the “You gotta be kidding me” file: House just voted on 2 bills that would undercut new financial regulations

This one somehow snuck past me.

I happen to read on Populist Jim Hightower’s website about this one here and I went and looked it up and sure enough; there it was in black and white:

The story:

WASHINGTON –– To Wall Street, this town might seem like enemy territory. But even as federal regulators and prosecutors extract multibillion-dollar penalties from the nation’s biggest banks, Wall Street can rely on at least one ally here: the House of Representatives.

The House is scheduled to vote on two bills this week that would undercut new financial regulations and hand Wall Street a victory. The legislation has garnered broad bipartisan support in the House, even after lawmakers learned that Citigroup lobbyists helped write one of the bills, which would exempt a wide array of derivatives trading from new regulation.

The bills are part of a broader campaign in the House, among Republicans and business-friendly Democrats, to roll back elements of the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act, the most comprehensive regulatory overhaul since the Depression. Of 10 recent bills that alter Dodd-Frank or other financial regulation, six have passed the House this year. This week, if the House approves Citigroup’s legislation and another bill that would delay heightened standards for firms that offer investment advice to retirees, the tally would rise to eight.

Both the Treasury Department and consumer groups have urged lawmakers to reject the bills, warning that they could leave the nation vulnerable again to excessive financial risk taking. The House proposals stand little chance of becoming law, having received a much chillier reception in the Senate and at the White Ho

via House, Set to Vote on 2 Bills, Is Seen as an Ally of Wall St. – NYTimes.com.

You believe those greedy bastards? Jim Hightower is not amused and rightly so:

Audio:

[podcast]

Partial Quote:

On the day before Halloween, the ethically-challenged members of our lobbyist-haunted House of Representatives did a perverse imitation of “Profiles in Courage,” turning that body into “Profiles in Spinelessness.”

In particular, they cravenly caved in to an outrageous and dangerous demand by Wall Street whiners. Such financial powerhouses as Citigroup just hate having their profiteering recklessness restrained by the regulatory reforms passed after their 2008 financial meltdown. Even though the shockwaves from that Wall Street collapse continue to devastate America’s middle class, the banking elite have completely recovered – including recovering their swaggering arrogance and ability to sway money-hungry congress critters with rich campaign donations. — Read the rest at Jim Hightower’s site

I am shocked that more Conservatives are not swinging from the trees on this one here! To their credit, there are some Democrat Party house members that are opposed to this bill and rightly so. This is the same idiotic crap that brought down the stock market and killed our economy; thank goodness there is some semblance of sanity up on the hill.

Sure enough the Bill passed the house, But it is not expected to make it through the Senate and the White House has said that they would veto the thing, if it made it to the President’s desk. Which in this instance is a very good thing. However, this is not the point. What is the point is this: Those same bastards who caused the great meltdown of 2008, are now lobbying our Government to put things back as they were, so that this sort of thing could happy again. That my friends is enough to make an economic populist, like myself, to want to bite a nail in two! 😡

The people that caused the Wall Street meltdown and downturn in our economy ought to be brought up on treason charges, and lined up against a wall and shot! 😡 But, instead, they are trying to buy their way back to lawlessness. This my friends, is an outrage.