"Keep Christ in Christmas"

I have noticed a plethora of these signs this season-more so than in the past. It is a nice message if it weren't for the fact that they are politically motivated and intended to skewer another over their political beliefs. It reminds me of the anti- Vietnam war protest so many years ago when a construction worker in NYC tried to impale a protester with an American flag pole. There is something un-American and un-Christian about using Christmas to drive home a political message. Is the point an anti-Obama one or is it a statement about what some believe is happening in public schools in this country? No child is kept from praying if they want, as long as it does not disrupt the class. No student group that wants to pray before class is stopped from doing so. The only thing that has changed from 50 years ago is that the school or teacher can not lead students in prayer; the establishment clause of the First Amendment so demands. A Supreme Court ruling in 1962 made this ruling.

Corporations and Taxes

I have always heard from the GOPers in my family that corporations should not pay taxes, due to the fact that those profits are already being taxed via the individuals tax payment. At least that is what I believe the argument is. However, due to the recent Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United it would seem to me that this argument not longer holds water. In that Supreme Court case the justices decided that corporations are people and-in this case at least-are entitled to spend whatever they want to on political campaigns because to deny them that right would be a violation of the First Amendment's free speech protection. Thus if a corporation is a person, and a person must pay income tax to the federal government, then it should follow then that the corporation should also have to pay income taxes to the federal government.

"Class Warfare"

With all this talk about "class warfare", I've been thinking about the teaching of the "isms". Under Fascism the classes were all suppose to work toward the betterment of the state and the individual did not count for much other than what they could do for the state. Under Communism the classes were all suppose to disappear with society then being one big classless structure. What about the classes under American Democracy? They clearly exist, there does not seem to be any disagreement with that. It seems that in this country all the classes are suppose to be happy in their place-you know the phrase "know their place"-and even look up to or hope to become one of the "elite" one percent.

It just appears to me that the lower classes-which ever ones they are-are placed in a status of second-class citizenship who are suppose to accept whatever the society-the elite-wants to let them have. I am going to use a term here that everyone knows and I hope you try to understand where I am coming from. You don't have to be an Afro-American to be a nigger in the USA today. A person put in that group is one without rights and open for persecution. I see that term as what our society imposes on other people; not what those other people in fact are. I remember back in my teaching days in the 1970's we used an article entitled "the student as nigger" and while I don't have that article anymore, I have a sense that it could apply to many in our society today: gays, poor people, Latinos, certain religious groups, homeless.

Politics and Spending

Congress has passed a $ 662 billion defense bill, that was $ 27 billion less than President Obama wanted. Only 13 Senators and 136 House members voted against the spending.

President Obama wants an extension of the payroll tax cut that was in effect this year, and he wants to increase that tax cut for next year. That's great for those middle class folks who are still working but why, when Social Security is under attack from the GOP, does a democratic president want to further undermine the funding for that program.

We have a major debt problem, and we can't get the wealthy to kick in a little more from the tax breaks they benefited from over the last decade, so we add to that debt problem by further reducing the revenue the government takes in. Doesn't make much sense to me.

Mission Accomplished-Again

Now it is Barack Obama's turn to tell us that the war in Iraq is over. First Bush from the aircraft carrier while dressed in a flight suit, and now Obama. We are now being told that by the end of the year all US combat troops will be "home for Christmas". NBC's Nightly News program tells us tonight that while the US Army will be out of Iraq, the US government will not. The new US embassy in Baghdad will be the biggest in the world and a new consulate building in Basra-near the oil fields-will also be a massive structure. There will remain in Iraq after the new year some 16,000 to 17,000 US government "employees", many of them CIA officers. Basra, as we know, is in the oil region of Iraq and it is also very close to Iran. A high ranking officer interviewed for the program-I did not note his name-said that if the need arises there are still divisions of US troops in "the region" if not in Iraq. With a major consulate building and scores of "diplomatic" types in the oil region, can you now still hold to the belief that it was not about the oil all along?

"Class Warfare"

I will be recording comments that deal with another issue of concern for the GOP this election season; that being the charge of "class warfare" leveled at the democrats and liberals because of some program they might support.

My first entry is that of the payment to chief executives of "stock options" in lieu of salary. Salary would be taxed at the rate of that persons accumulated income...maybe as high as 33 % for those at the top of the income ladder. If that same executive was paid in stock options and he sold those stocks at some latter date, that income would be taxed as a "capital gain" and would be at a much lower tax rate-somewhere around 15 % I believe. Now this is contingent upon my understanding the stock option plan. More research will be required.

Another issue here is that of income made as "interest" and money made as "dividend". Dividend income is not taxed at all while interest income is taxed as part of a worker's total income which usually makes it around 15 or 20 %. On top of that the banks are only paying less than one-tenth of one percent on that money paying interest.

To me, these two items are an indication that there is in fact class warfare being waged in this country and the only conclusion one could come to is the rich are winning-or have already won the war.

"Exceptionalism"

I will be starting a new file about items I read of that might deal with the issue of American "exceptionalism" that the GOP candidates like to talk about. America is an exceptional nation they say, and my guess is they think there are few if any things we have to regret in our past or present conduct as a nation.

I will start the file with a notation about a program I read about in the New York Times on-line on 12/11/11 that dealt with the "eugenics" program in the state of North Carolina. From 1933 to 1977 that state ordered the sterilization of some 7000 people who the state considered of low mentality, poor or in one case at least of a woman who had been raped by an older man. The state is due to release a report in February 2012 about this program and if any money will be paid for the victims who still alive. More on this later.

Herman Cain

So I read that Herman Cain is "at piece with his God", "at piece with himself" and "at piece with his wife". He sure knows a good piece when he sees one.

On another note...how can a religious fundamentalist politician break the commandment of "thou shalt not commit adultery" and then say he is "at peace with his God?"

Defense Spending re Debt Issue

On the first page of the Virginian Pilots "Hampton Roads" section is a picture of two Blue Angels jets flying over the region. One is upside down and it appears the tail fins on both planes are touching. Nice operation and I am sure a great show, however, at $ 18,000 an hour to fly one of these planes, isn't there a better use of $ 36,000 of tax money than to hot-dog it in a mega-million dollar toy?

Sex Scandals and Politics

The Herman Cain campaign's attorney-Lin Wood-made the following comment regarding an accusation-by a Georgia woman-that she had a 13 year affair with Cain. "This is not an accusation of harassment in the workplace-this is not an accusation of an assault-which are subject matters of legitimate inquiry to a political candidate. Rather, this appears to be an accusation of private, alleged consensual conduct between adults-a subject matter which is not a proper subject of inquiry by the media or the public". Well, they didn't say that when it was Clinton doing the boinking.

Political Logic

A family GOPer tells me that the European debt crisis is the key to US politics. That being because if the southern countries in Europe devalue their currency it would adversely impact the US currency. Now those southern Europe countries all have socialist governments and because Obama is a socialist-so they say-then it is important to vote him out of office. How can one argue with that kind of logic.

Miscellaneous News

Some items of interest to this writer. A letter to the editor of the Virginian Pilot on 11/26/11 stated that the congressional panel-"Debt Panel"-should resign due to their failure to come to a final decision on the debt. These were members of congress noted for their commitment to their country and their "ability to accomplish a task". Unfortunately this request will be totally ignored by the congressmen in question.

Second item was the news that since 2001 there have been 23 CIA agents killed in the line of duty. The article was asking people to donate money for the future education of their children. One of the agents killed was part of a team that went into Afghanistan 16 days after the 911 attacks. The site to send donations is "ciamemorialfoundation.org".

US Budget Problems

A news letter from the office of Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, notes that while Bush II inherited from Clinton a budget surplus, he managed to convert that into "record-breaking deficits because of Bush's huge tax breaks for the rich, two wars, the Medicare Part D prescription drug program written by the insurance industry and the Wall Street bailout-all unpaid for. Now, having driven up the national debt, those same Republicans are hell-bent on moving toward 'deficit reduction'". Why is Bernie Sanders the only politician making this point? It seems to me that the republican party has intentionally created this trillion dollar deficit problem in an effort to cut domestic programs which they can't stand, or take credit for.

Political Priorities

I thought the following quote from The Record newspaper was a good indication of where the two major parties stand on the issue of debt reduction. "...Republicans demanding large cuts in benefit programs such as Social Security and Medicare while Democrats pressed for additional tax revenue as a condition for agreeing to make deep spending cuts". That still leaves me in dismay. If the GOP gives in to the tax increases will the democrats then agree to cut Social Security and Medicare? That is a proposal I would never support, knowing that the present economic crisis we face was caused originally by the fighting of wars we didn't need to fight and giving away a trillion dollars to the rich under the Bush II tax plan of 2003. Social Security did not cause the problem thus there is no reason to make Social Security pay for it.

(Source: "Democrats revamp super committee offer" by David Espo and Andrew Taylor of the AP. In The Record on 11/10/11).

American Politics

Herman Cain is a candidate for president of the United States; a position that has been described as the most powerful office in the free world. Cain has presented a plan to radically change our income tax structure and the way the federal government funds itself. It is referred to as the "9-9-9" plan and would alter individual, corporate income taxes, capital gains taxes and sales taxes. It is an important topic for Americans to discuss and decide on. At the same time he has been accused of sexual misconduct that occurred some 20 years ago. Guess which of these issues is getting major coverage on nightly news programs? I will not insult your intelligence to answer that question.

Another view on this issue is the following. I am not going to vote for a republican-maybe not a democrat either-and I would most certainly not support the flat tax concept that is part of the "9-9-9" plan. Thus the negative issue that Cain now faces regarding his behavior toward women, for me, serves and important purpose. That being to discredit Cain and thus in the process, his tax plan. By my way of thinking, if you can't get him one way, you get him another. It is almost akin to the feds going after Al Capone in the 1930's. They couldn't get him for murder so they went after his income tax return. I know, this is a hell of an analogy but I throw it out there anyway. I am not comparing Cain to Capone, but if his income tax program won't sink his candidacy then hopefully the sexual misconduct issue will.

Herman Cain

Herman Cain-the GOP candidate for President-stated on FOX news online that he believes "race" is a factor in the stories that have come out about him and the issue of sexual harassment. He also believes that "Democrats, liberals" are behind the attacks and "some people on the right" are also to blame. However, he stated that he believes "race" is the motivating factor for democrats and liberals. What a crock, republicans spread negative personal attacks on each other and they blame democrats for them. Charles Krauthamer on FOX news asks him about the issue and its the "liberal press" that is out to get him? It would seem to me that his response to the sexual harassment charge is worse than the charge itself. If he would have been forthright and contrite from the first, the story would have faded away, and as Nixon would tell you, when you start lying the molehill becomes a mountain.

Liberals v. Conservatives

After reading a Progressive Magazine interview with journalist Chris Hedges I have come to a conclusion about politics in this country today. People are angry and they are directing that anger at liberals rather than conservatives. That may be because we don't expect much from the conservative position except tax cuts, states rights and less regulation of business. Same old shit just different day. This message has not changed in 30 years. But with liberals we had hoped for a "change" and a change to something better than the conservative dribble. We believed in that change and it didn't come. We thought things would be different and they are not. We are still at war, we still have the wealthy walking away with most of everything and we still are facing domestic programs in danger of being gutted to something we would not recognize. Yes, we are angry and it is the liberals and democrats (even thou they are not very liberal) who we will blame. This maybe what the "Occupy Wall Street" movement is all about. I do think if one is going to continue to vote, then a third party is the answer. A third party with a left leaning point of view.

Guns

The National Right to Carry Reciprocity Act HR 822 is being debated in the House this week. It would allow anyone "permitted to carry a hidden gun in their own state would also be allowed to carry it in any state". This would be a case of federal law "overriding a state's own policy on guns". There are 242 cosponsors in the House to this legislation and Scott Garrett of the 5th CD in NJ is one of them. Besides this being a terrible idea, what about the concept of states rights that the conservative ideology is always talking about? According to these people the federal government has no business telling someone to buy health insurance but it is alright to force a state and its citizens to allow guns onto their streets and into their parks against the wishes of that state. This is another incredible example of the power of the National Rifle Association.

Merchants of Death

It is reported in a column by Walter Pincus in the Washington Post that the US is selling $ 12 billion in weapons to Iraq, including $3 billion worth of F-16 fighter jets. We are also selling or giving weapons to the neighbors of Iraq, including Israel. The US arms industry-after world war I-was referred to as the "merchants of death" and many at the time believed it was one of the reasons we were drawn into that conflict. It looks like the "merchants" are back in business, big time.

Obama and Race

I was told by a white southern female that she voted for Barack Obama but was upset that he has failed to "bring us together" as a society. She meant this in a racial way; as in bring the races together to end prejudice. I thought-but unfortunatly did not say-that this was a cruel charge to make of our first "black" president. Our society has been divided racial, and still is, but to blame a black man for not ending that is incredible. In the 1960's the Kerner Commission Report on race in America noted that the racial divide in this country was caused by "white racism" and I see no reason to think anything substantial has changed. For a white southern to blame a black man for not ending racial prejudice in America is further proof that "white racism" is still the problem.

Government Spending

I wonder how many New Jerseyans are complaining about the US government spending too much money while they wait in line at FEMA offices for a disaster relief check necessitated by Hurricane Irene and recent river flooding?

In regard to federal government spending, I would suggest the following. The analogy of the government spending being comparable to the spending by a family is wrong. A family determines how much revenue they have coming in and then decide how to allocate it. So much for rent, food, clothes and whatever. However, a government should decide what the needs of the society are and then determine how much revenue is needed to fill those needs. Some people today want the government to raise as little revenue as possible and then fight over how to spend those limited dollars.

GOP Governors

I wonder how many republican governors-like Christie-will piss and moan about the Obama jobs stimulus package, as a program that will add to the already large national debt, and then when running for re-election will take credit for added jobs in their state that the Obama stimulus package created?

Dominionism

It was reported in the Virginian Pilot today that some republican presidential candidates are believers in "dominionism". According to WikiPedia this belief maintains that the "nation (should be) governed by a conservative Christian understanding of biblical law, or a nation governed by Christians". "Soft" Dominionists believe America is a Christian nation. "Hard" Dominionists are those who advocate the establishment of a theocracy. Another web site notes that Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry "have deep ties to a fringe fundamentalist movement known as 'dominionism' which says Christians should rule the world". It would be good idea to read Kevin Phillips American Theocracy from 2006.

(Source: "American theocracy revisited" by Ross Douthat of the NY Times. In The Virginian Pilot on 9/6/11).

Civil War/Racial Syndrome

I have been thinking of this since the election of 2008. I think some people voted for Barack Obama so they could say they were not prejudiced and they wanted to show that white America was giving black America a chance. These people can now say that, look, America is not a biased society, we have elected a black man to the presidency. Now these people can ignore the still racist society we all live in, believing they have done all they can to prove how much America has changed. It is similiar, I am sure, to how many Americans felt after the Civil War. Even though the Civil War was not fought to free the slaves-as those who know something about American history and the war know-many Americans at the time felt that now they had proved they were not prejudiced and they had done something very important for the black race. Having felt that way they could then wash their hands of the racial divisions in the society and go on about their lives free of any kind of guilt about having enslaved a race of people for over 250 years.

Now in 2011 Americans can say and believe (in their hearts) that white America has purged itself of any lingering racial bias and it is time for black America to stop complaining about racism and "being the last hired and the first fired", get to work and to stop living on entitlements.

Political Choices

If I believe that the wealthy-those making in excess of $ 250,000-should pay more income tax than current law now requires, who do I vote for?
Candidate A says the wealthy should be given an income tax cut like all other income groups and he means it.
Candidate B says the wealthy should pay more income tax than those in lower income brackets but doesn't mean it.
Which of these two candidates should get my vote?

Government Spending

I've been on the road lately and have noticed how much road construction is going on. The NJ Turnpike and Route 17/I-86 in NY are two of those places. The delays caused by the activity may be annoying at times but the sight of people working and doing meaningful and important work is well worth it. If the private sector will not or can not employ Americans then the federal government must take up the slack. People need work and the paying for that work creates a ripple effect through the entire economy. The money spent on these projects will be immediately pumped back into the economy on rent, food, clothing and a other goods and services. This will be much more effective than giving more money to those who already have more than they can spend and are only hiding it in off-shore accounts or otherwise sitting on it. Besides, these are jobs that can't be out-sourced by Americans companies looking for the cheapest labor they can find. The debt the US government creates by spending on infastructure improvements will pay off in the long run. I would rather see money being spent in the US than in Iraq or Afghanistan; we will appreciate it, they won't.

Budget Cutting

Regarding the issue of the federal budget and what should be cut from it for the remainder of this fiscal year, it seems the House GOP wants $ 40 billion cut while the Democrats want $ 33 billion reduction. The negotiation settled on $ 38.5 billion cut. Sure seems like the House GOP is calling the shots. Imagine if the GOP held the Presidency and the Senate; we have only a military. If my math is correct that means there is only a 17.5 % difference between the two parties on the issue of cutting spending and the budget. When the GOP gets through with its knife, the only thing left will be the military; then we can attack another country. Soon the only growth industries in the US will be flags, body bags and coffins.

Nuclear Power

Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania 1979, Chernobyl in Ukraine 1986, and now Fukushima Daiichi in Japan. Don't you think it is time we all re-thought the adviseability of this source of energy? I would also suggest that the use of nuclear power should not be the decision of one country. If the Ukraine opts for nuclear but Sweden and Finland have to suffer the conscequences of an accident then the decision should be not the Ukraine's to make. Japan has chosen to use nuclear power-knowing full well the negative effects of radiation-but many other countries and their citizens will suffer the effects now that an accident has occurred.

Federal Government Debt

The following sentence was from an article about the budgetary battle going on between Obama and the GOP. "The federal government's tax revenues are at their lowest level in 60 years, when measured against the size of the economy, largely because of a weak economy and the extension of Bush era tax cuts approved in December, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office". This should be front-page material on every newspaper in the country. Until this fact is acknowledged, all talk of cutting domestic spending-social security and medicare-should be put on hold.

(Source: "Battle lines drawn over spending" by Stephen Ohlemacher of The AP. In The Virginian Pilot on 3/12/11).

Wealth

The richest person in the world-according to an article in The Virginian Pilot today-is one Carlos Slim, worth $ 74 billion. It doesn't seem right or just that in a nation as poor as Mexico also has the richest man in the world. This source also notes that Bill Gates is worth $ 56 billion but is giving alot of it away to charity, and Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook worth $ 13 billion. Forbes magazine provides this information and tells us that there are now 1210 billionaires in the world and their collective wealth is $ 4.5 trillion; that is 199 more than last year. I wonder if the Bush II tax cuts put any other Americans in that group?

Democrats ?

Another non-democrat democrat wants to reduce the federal deficit by cutting domestic spending and altering social security. Hey, Senator Mark Warner, what about getting us out of Iraq and Afghanistan, stop sending our tax money to Egypt and end tax policies that are give-aways to the Plutocracy. I am waiting to see one major politician admit that we are in the federal deficit problem we are because of the Bush II decisions to make war at the same time he cut income taxes for the very rich; a course of action never before undertaken in this country. If the democratic party was really a separate political entity, they would make that case.

Psy-ops on US Senators

Rolling Stone magazine reports that the head of the "psy-ops" unit in Afghanistan-Lt Col Michael Holmes-was ordered by his superior- Lt Gen William Caldwell-to "perform psychological operations" on visiting US senators, congressman and other officials in order to get them to approve more troops for the war in Afghanistan. Holmes refused to go along. Those involved were John McCain, Joe Lieberman, Carl Levin, Jack Reed, Al Franken and Admiral Mike Mullen. We are told that Gen David Petraeus has ordered an investigation; I am not holding my breath. The article in the magazine-not on the stands yet-was written by Michael Hastings and titled "Another runaway General: Army deploys psy-ops on US Senators".

I have seen nothing other than this CNN article about this issue in The Record, NY Times or on NBC Nightly news with Brian Williams. Where is the "liberal media" when you need it?

(Source: "Rolling Stone: Army manipulated visiting VIP's in Afghanistan". cnn.com on 2/24/11).

High Stakes Chicken

It seems like the major sides in Washington are playing that old game of "chicken". In the 1950's two cars would race toward a cliff with each driver trying to be the last one to jump out before the car went over the cliff. I believe that scene was in "Rebel Without a Cause". In DC today the conservatives are backing military spending and tax cuts for the wealthy while the liberals are in favor of spending more on domestic programs and easing the burden on the less well off. They are playing "chicken"; which side will give in first. If neither side does we have a major economic crisis on our hands, which I have to believe neither one really wants. In my opinion the liberals-or in this case the democrats-are not as committed to their core values as the conservatives-or republicans-and will try "chicken" first.

Congressional "Intelligence"

GOP congressman Christoher Lee of Western NY state has recently resigned his seat in the House. It appears he posted his picture-bare chested-and his real name on Craigslist looking for women. He is married and been in Congress since 2008. He described himself as "a very fit fun classy guy...I promise not to disappoint". The immorality of his actions are bad enough and I am sure he has caused his family considerable harm. But what about his stupidity. He is a public figure who was identifible by a google search, he used his real name, his picture and lied about his marital status to seek out women. How could someone so incredibly stupid get elected to congress? It doesn't say much for those who voted for him.

Recent Legislation

I have read of some votes of interest coming out of the Congress recently. One involved GOP legislation that would begin the debate on cutting $ 60 billion or more from the budget for 2011. It was approved by a vote of 256 to 165. However, the democrats wanted a provision added that would "deny federal contracts to any company that the Department of Labor finds to be outsourcing its jobs". That provision was defeated by the GOP including Scott Garrett from my district. Why would the GOP oppose a plan to keep jobs in this country? This was in HR-38. Another piece of legislation that failed due to GOP opposition was a provision to require "TV attack ads and other campaign spots to identify the corporation, union or foreign government paying for it". The vote was 228 to 173. The bill is H 359. Votes in the Senate were also disturbing. They both were on filibusters. The first vote defeated legislation that would have required Senators to be "present and talking" while conducting a filibuster that was aimed at "killing a bill or nomination". Does this mean a senator can be in the "john" while filibustering? I guess he can fart it to death. This was SR 21. The second bill would have allowed for the reduction of votes needed to end a filibuster from 60 votes to 51-a simple majority. It failed by a vote of 84 to 12 with one of the 12 being Frank Lautenberg of NJ. Maybe this is what passes for bi-partisanship in the Senate.

(Source: "North Jersey Tally: How your US lawmakers voted" In The Record on 1/30/11)

Federal Gov't Power

The Tea Party folk complain that President Obama is seeking "overreaching power" for the federal government with his health care law. Why didn't they make the same protest when Bush II wiretapped phones and e-mails of US citizens without a court ordered warrant even when the court is a secret one. That was the law and still is-to my knowledge-making his actions illegal and "overreaching" illegal grab for power.

US Constitution

I came across two news items today that might be of interest to those in the Tea Party movement who want to read the Constitution in its "original intent". The "strict constructionist" view of the document is that the government can not do anything not specifically granted to it by the Constitution . Back in 2008 Jack Kevorkian ran for congress-and lost-partly on a platform of assisted suicide being protected by the 9th Amendment. The argument being that the amendment protects peoples rights that are not "explicitly specified elsewhere in the Constitution". Under the "original intent" view this would be a protected right of the people. The second item was in a Cal Thomas column in The Virginian Pilot for today. He noted that some members of Congress wanted the original wording of the Constitution read into the record when recently done in Congress. That would mean that the enslaved population of black Americans would only count as three-fifths of the white population: the "Three-fifths Compromise". In my opinion the Constitution must be seen-and read-as a "living document" that can change or evolve over time. That's what the Supreme Court is there for; to determine if new legislation violates the basic protections in the Constitution. That's why after two hundred and twenty two years the same document still rules this country.

GOP Budget Cuts?

The plan that House republicans want to enact in regard to the federal budget would require cutting $ 100 billion from the budget or returning to a budget set in 2006 that would require a $ 175 billion reduction in spending. The Virginian Pilot from today says the cuts would be in the following areas. Elimination of Legal Services Corp (they provide poor people legal assistance), Amtrak subsidies, community development grants, economic aid to Egypt (why only them?), put a 5 year freeze on the pay of federal workers and cut their work force by 15 %. The White House says cutting $ 100 billion "could force 400,000 childdren out of Head Start, reduce the size of Pell Grants for low income students by $ 1000 and force the Justice Dept to forlough 4000 FBI agents and 900 US marshalls".

Health Care Law 2010

The House voted today to repeal the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" of 2010. According to CNN the law is as follows.

1. extends health insurance to 32 million Americans.

2. bars health insurers from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions.

3. eliminates lifetime caps on coverage.

4. allows families to keep children on their policies till age 26.

5. requires Americans to buy insurance if they don't now have it.

6. provides subsidies for small businesses and individuals.

7. requires insurers to cover preventive care.

8. sets up independent review process for people who feel their claims are unfairly denied.

The Dept of Health and Human Services states "130 million nonelderly Americans with pre-existing conditions would be at risk of losing their insurance" without the law.

The CBO says repealing the law would cost $ 230 billion by 2021.

Republicans and Democrats disagree on almost all of this and its impact on the country.

(Source: www.cnn.com/2011/Politics/01/19/healthcare/?hpt=T1).

Arizona Killings 2011 Jan

I read in the paper today that the ammunition for the Glock handgun used to kill 6 people and wound Congresswoman Gabby Gifford was purchased in a Walmart store in Tucson. The article also notes that the gunman had a choice of bullets to buy. The ones he used were "full metal jacket range rounds" but he could have paid more and gotten the "self-defense rounds that mushroom upon impact". I ask myself the following questions. Why does a store that sells toys, food and other home goods also sell bullets? Why can't that type of sale be restricted to a gun shop? Where would the violation of the 2nd Amendment occur in that case? Secondly, I ask why someone has any need at all for a bullet that "mushrooms" on impact causing a greater likelyhood of death. Why would the NRA protect such a weapon?

Shot Heard Around the World

The right wing and Tea Party types have been calling for a "revolution" for awhile now. Sarah Palin has said "don't retreat, re-load". A Texas Tea Party congressional candidate stated that if change does not come by the election process, then it will have be come by armed rebellion. He lost his election. Could the political assassination attempt in Arizona of Gabby Gifford and the killings of five others there be the second coming of the "shot heard around the world"?

Race and Justice

It seems to be still an issue in certain parts of the US today. Consider the case of two sisters sentenced to life in prison for armed robbery of $ 11. They were teenagers at the time of the crime but it was still "armed robbery"-a serious crime. But life in prison seems a bit excessive. The sisters are black and the place is Mississippi (Phil Ochs sang in the 1960' about Mississippi "finding another country to be part of"). The sisters were released from prison this past week after serving 16 years. That is not the end of the story. The older sister has kidney failure and her "medical condition is costing the state a lot of money". You have to wonder why the release now after already serving an excessive prison term; is it the right thing to do or is the state just too cheap to provide medical care to a inmate. The release story takes another turn when it is known that part of the deal is that the younger sister will have to donate a kidney to her sibling. The governor-Haley Barbour-says the sister volunteered. To top it off the NAACP "thanked Barbour" calling his suspension of the sentence a "shining example" of the governor's use of the clemency power. The head of the state NAACP said this was a "great victory for the state of Mississippi (and) two individuals who received an excessive sentence". If this is what passes for a racial victory in Mississippi, I would say Phil Ochs is still relevent.

(Source: "Kidney key to sister's release" by Holbrook Mohr of the AP. In The Record on 12/31/10)