Ammunition

We have heard over the course of the primaries from the Republican side how Obama's idea of talking to our enemies is akin to appeasement. How it's naive and a sign of weakness.

Well sometimes a little ammunition is needed to fight these misguided talking points.

So here it is. So my friends - lock and load.

There's more...

Twelve Years in the Wilderness

Twelve Years in the Wilderness....

Some people today call GWB a "monster".  Well, he is, but to me he is a cartoon monster.  It is out there in the open;  he doesn't have a glib, suave speaking style and he is moronic.  But what gave birth to GWB and nurtured him?   Who allowed the republican party to be hijacked by a bunch of hypocritical fundies and allowed their agenda to be thrust onto the American people?   President Reagan.  He is the granddaddy of all monsters and he is actually worse that GWB.

What, you say?  Come on.  Nope, he is - because Reagan is still looked upon favorably by many and the MSM adores him.  He is worse than GWB because Reagan wore a mask that hid his true features.  Some of you are too young to remember those years or perhaps you were not yet born.

I came politically aware in the 1980's.  I was sixteen years old when Reagan took office.   I saw him with his "trickle-down" economics that trickled down shit to the middle class and the poor.  I saw him dismantled the Department of Education, making it harder for middle class kids, like me, to go to college.  I saw a President who actively thrust himself into worker's rights, taking the wrong side and busting up PATCO.  The employees only sought better working conditions, better pay and a 32-hour workweeks.  What a far cry from FDR, who supported and promoted Unions.  

I saw an administration that cuddled up with Saddam Hussein, knowing what they knew about him.  I saw Reagan playing the Middle-East like a game of chess, stating one thing, while dealing to the other side - Iran-Contra.  Horrific.  An impeachable offense, which never happened.  

I saw Reagan's support of the Saving and Loans with deregulation, which caused the U.S Savings and Loan crisis in the late 1980's and early 1990's.  John Kenneth Galbraith, an economist,  called it "the largest and costliest venture in public misfeasance, malfeasance and larceny of all time." It cost 160.1 billion, of which 124.6 billion was paid BY the US citizens.  

I saw Reagan promote the "Welfare Queen" myth, using a woman from the South Side of Chicago as an example - "She has 80 names, 30 addresses, 12 Social Security cards and is collecting veteran's benefits on four non-existing deceased husbands. And she is collecting Social Security on her cards. She's got Medicaid, getting food stamps, and she is collecting welfare under each of her names." Of course, there was never such a person.

He ignored the AIDS crisis, because he could not say the word gay or homosexual.  It wasn't until grandmothers got infected that he mentioned it.  It wasn't until 1987 - when 36,058 Americans had been already diagnosed with AIDS and 20,849 had died.  By that time, the disease had spread to 113 countries, with more than 50,000 cases.

Reagan talked about the "Evil Empire", when in fact, he was truly evil.  But with his glib style and his folksy way of speaking, people ignored it.  Even today, republicans want to put Reagan on Mt. Rushmore and replace Ike with Reagan on the dime.  Reagan is the true monster because he wore a mask which hid his true face.  When you opened the doors to enter "Shining City upon a hill", the corrosive stench would knock you out.  

Those people that worked in the Reagan/Bush I administration came out to play in the GWB administration.  Reagan created the monster.  And his legacy is GWB.

What does Reagan have to do with 2008?  Twelve years in the wilderness.  That is how long the Reagan/Bush I years lasted before a man from Hope took back the White House.  Some of you are critical of President Clinton, but understand this - after 12 years of republicans fucking with our country, President Clinton had to FIX it.  With a house that was hostile to him, even when Democrats had the majority.  He didn't get all that needed to be done, but he managed to undo a lot of the damage those 12 years inflicted on this country and its people.

Whoever is our Democratic nominee, I will support them.  They will face the same challenges that President Clinton faced - to undo the horrific damage done to this country.

I am supporting our Democratic nominee - whoever he or she may be.  For those who state "I hated their tactics" or "Candidate XX is not a TRUE democrat" or "McCain isn't THAT bad".....think about this - Twelve FUCKING years in the wilderness.  Senators Obama and Clinton are not evil, they are not the enemy.  You may disagree with some of their policies - hell, I do.  You may disapprove of their campaign tactics - hell, I do.  But in the end, they are on the same team.  The differences between Obama and Hillary can be typed up, double-spaced, 20 point font and 3 inch margins all around, on one piece of 8 1/2 by 11 paper.  Whoever is the nominee will have the other's back and strongly support them.

McCain of 2008 is NOT McCain of 2000.  Don't trust him.  Otherwise, it will be another 12 years in the wilderness.  Who knows what will be born of the GWB/McCain years?  If Reagan/Bush I spawned GWB, can you imagine what GWB/McCain will spawn?

I am supporting our Democratic nominee.  Will you join me and end our endless wandering in the wilderness?

There's more...

Obama says he'll throwback to Bush 41, Reagan

On Friday, Senator Obama said his foreign policy would be something like Bush 1, Reagan and Kennedy.

WTF?

Excerpts from MSNBO First Read 3/29/2008


From NBC/NJ's Aswini Anburajan
GREENBURG, PA -- Barack Obama promised that his foreign policy would be a return to what he says was the realist approach practiced by George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan.

There is more

There's more...

The Rise of Income Disparity

Harold Meyerson of The American Prospect has a great new piece up regarding the shrinkage of the middle class over the last two decades.  His first target is the notion among some that technological advances contributed greatly to the growing disparity between the middle and upper class.  By this logic, it was technology that allowed educated workers to be more productive and thusly more valuable than those who worked more labor intensive jobs.  Meyerson notes the fallacy of this argument:

In the 1980s, economic inequality in America soared. Many mainstream economists at the time laid the blame on technological change, which enabled better educated Americans to benefit from productivity gains while less educated Americans lagged behind. As Thomas Lemieux, an economist at the University of British Columbia, argues in a paper ("The Changing Nature of Wage Inequality") issued by the National Bureau of Economic Research last October, that thesis failed to explain why the same rise in inequality wasn't evident in other advanced economies undergoing analogous technological changes.

There's more...

Obama's false Reagan analogy

I think Obama's comments about Reagan, both past and present, are interesting.

Reagan "transformed" politics in some ways but people seem to forget the context behind the 80's.

There's more...

Diaries

Advertise Blogads