The quest for your vote has begun. Voters are courted during political campaigns through inspiring messages, false promises, misrepresentations, half-truths, fear and bigotry. We are told how important it is to vote -- which is true -- but the day after election we the voters are forgotten while the contributors are remembered. Although the candidates supposedly run on their platforms -- the issues that face America -- their campaigns focus on trivia: dogs on car roofs, car elevators, the President's vacations, golf games or late night TV appearances, statements made by aides, whether 9/11 or the killing of Osama bin Laden are proper subjects for campaign ads, etc.
The Republicans have a dual dilemma this year because they are dissatisfied with both of the real candidates. They want Mitt Romney to be someone other than who he truly is, and they have created a fictitious President Obama so they can run against him rather than the actual one. While they try to rally the troops around abortion, gay marriage and gun rights, the real issues, like the real candidates, remain largely ignored. Differences help to distinguish the candidates one from the other, but it is agreement for which the public pines.
We want cooperation in jobs growth, improved tax reform, improved infrastructure, improved education, affordable health care for all, sensible immigration legislation, less reliance on foreign oil, a clean environment and healthy food. We want government waste eliminated, wars ended, the deficit reduced and an end to the childish bickering which now dominates Washington. We want representatives who are more interested in us than themselves and their supporters. But sadly, after the election those votes which we so freely give will not mean as much as those that have been bought. The corporations, the PACs, the special interest groups that dominate the elections will be heard and the voice of the voter ignored and forgotten (until next time).
I happen to think that President Obama is a great president with worthy goals. But no matter who is elected, unless Congress seeks middle ground the country will continue in its bitter downward spiral. The Republicans announced at the beginning of President Obama's term that their primary goal was to defeat him. They may succeed, but in their victory the country will have lost -- through 4 years of obstructionism. While the Republicans fiddled, America burned.
"... the actual loser of this presidential election (of 2000) was 'the Nation's confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law.'"
What concerns should the ordinary citizen have about Obamacare and Supreme Court Review? Read the third and final segment of three part series at
http://lifeamongtheordinary.blogspot.com/2012/05/obamacare-and-supreme-court-review-part_13.html
As a nation we always thought that if there were a crisis in this country our government would come together to resolve it-------- It now appears that the GOP have gone off the tracks with their obstructionist ideas and have forgotten about the economic crisis that is hollowing out the core of our great economic machine ( the Middle Class). These men have totally forgotten why so many other nations have wanted to build their middle classes.
Below is a snippet of history from the Gilded Age on the relationship between politics and big business
" "I believe in the division of labor. You send us to Congress; we pass laws under which you make money...and out of your profits, you further contribute to our campaign funds to send us back again to pass more laws to enable you to make more money."
— Senator Boies Penrose (R-Pa.), 1896, citing the relationship between his politics and big business
IOW, who could opossibly be competent to testify how the votes are counted, and could testify from their own personal knowledge that there was no tampering?
Get the money out of politics.
(1) A highly concentrated news media owned by six corporate conglomerates and funded by commercial advertising from the same private interests that are funding most political advertising, coupled with weak balance, accuracy, and equal access requirements. Unless they are legally or practically required to, commercial media *rarely* cover stories, people, or opinions that might seriously threaten the financial interests of their owners and advertisers. So even if we got *all* the private money out of election campaigns, the former campaign funders would still be controlling the news on which most Americans base their voting decisions.
(2) Outrageously weak conflict-of-interest and bribery rules for public officials. It is now routine for elected and appointed officials to use their public positions as a stepping stone to lucrative private-sector jobs. Even if our election campaigns were equally funded and our political coverage were indisputably accurate and balanced, it would still be astoundingly easy for our public officials to sell out the public interest once in office in exchange for generous post-service payoffs.
So, yes -- get the private money out of politics. But also deconglomeratize, deconcentrate, and diversify the media, and impose serious fairness, equal access, and right of reply requirements on it. And adopt some genuinely stringent conflict-of-interest and anti-corruption rules for public officials.
2 pieces of unrelated news, I graduate with my Masters in Psychiatric Nursing on Mother's Day, and I just told an ATT marketing rep that I dropped their service due to their support of ALEC. The latter felt almost as great as does the former news. Regards to you..always Momo
I've heard Republicans (I actually have close friends that are Republicans - it can be done - I wish Congress could follow suit) - say that they don't really like Romney for several reasons (religion usually tops the list for them), but they will not - ever - vote for Obama - even if he personally paid off the national debt, cured cancer, raised the income level to create a thriving economy, and personally invented fusion power as a hobby. You can only speculate as to why so many Republicans have actually taken oaths to not cooperate with the president - on any issue - even when a proposed policy will actually be in their best interests. They appear to be willing to retain a Congress that insists on punishing America for voting for this particular man - if re-elected - they will do everything they can to continue that punishment (through obstructionism) for another 4 years - fiddling away, as you have said, while America burns.
I've just been reading your bio - taking on BigTobacco, the Hurricane Rubin Case, etc. as well as graduating from one of my undergrad schools - Harvard - where I spent two years until the money ran out - and it was back to UMB and Northeastern. Your legacy cites you as an "activist judge" - which I find to be a misnomer: how about a judge interested in what the law states and will act on behalf of the law if special interests begin bending and twisting statutes? I can only begin to imagine what you felt like taking on Big-Interests.
I'm reading Elizabeth Holtzman's latest book, "Cheating Justice" (lawyer, House Judiciary Committee, who was instrumental in the impeachment proceedings of Richard Nixon - until he narrowly escaped) and is now making a legal case for prosecution of Bush and Cheney for such crimes in high office as lying to Congress, torture, etc. - & that's what they want back?
Who in their right mind could want villains like this back in power? Bush & friends gave us two horrifying wars (except for their crony war profiteers) and dismantled regulatory systems which gave us the sequel to the Great Depression. He even gave up looking for OBL - his real interest - nation building - became the focus of the administration. Obama takes out OBL in a relatively inexpensive surgical mission and now the Republicans are trying to denigrate him for even this.
Here someone from the State has already reprogrammed the voting machines.