Chris Dodd is a Liar

Image via Wikipedia

Former Congressman Chris Dodd (D – CT) is a liar.  He stated in 2010 that after retiring he would not accept any lobbying job.  Yet he has done just that by taking a job as a chairman for the Motion Picture Association of America and has admitted one of the top priorities is lobbying Congress on behalf of the movie industry.

His job? Fight to increase and make worse this country’s copyright laws instead of fixing the problems with them to bring them more in line with the age of the Internet.  This is blatant hypocrisy and clear evidence that he lied and had no intention of fulfilling the promise he made before retiring.

While this kind of bold hypocrisy is more rare among Democrats than it is Republicans, there’s no doubt that it still happens.  This is proof of it.  He is after all, a politician. What’s worse is that he’s using a loophole to get around a law forbidding members of Congress from becoming lobbyists within a certain amount of time after retiring from office.

Our responsibility as Americans is to stand up and speak out against this kind of hypocrisy by our elected officials.  If Chris Dodd ever runs for political office again we need to remember this lie and that he can no longer be trusted.

– “Left of Center”

Police Allowed to Clear Wisconsin Statehouse At Night

Image via Wikipedia

This afternoon (03-03-11), a Judge ruled that while the Wisconsin capitol building must remain open and accessible to demonstrators during normal business hours, it is now acceptable for police to clear the building after hours.  Protesters will no longer be able to stay inside the building over night.

As much as I am a supporter of the Pro-Union demonstrations that have been going on for more than week, I feel that this decision is both correct and fair.  Wisconsin’s State Constitution (Article I, Section 4) states that the Capitol building must remain open and accessible to the public during business hours only.

I understand that people were staying in the building overnight because of bad weather and to stage a sort of old-fashioned sit-in unending protest.  While I applaud the determination, I think it was unreasonable to expect that anyone would be or should be granted access to the building after hours.

There’s almost no chance that this will have any lasting effect on the protesters though.  Even if they now have to go home and then come back in the morning.  This is a serious issue and the Pro-Union side is absolutely on the correct side of history in this debate.

I encourage the protesters to remain vigilant despite this decision that they may perceive as a setback.  Keep up the good work in bringing attention to the growing battle against the middle class by the Conservatives and the ultra-rich.

– “Left of Center”

Catching Up, Part VII – The Arizona Tragedy

Image by Steve Rhodes via Flickr

I’d like to start by being another of many who wish Gabrielle Giffords and all others that were injured the speediest possible recovery.  Those that are no longer with us, may their families heal as best they can.  I hope also that many can and should learn a lesson in civility from this sad situation.

Unfortunately it was only a matter of time before something like this happened.  As divisive, heated, hateful and ignorant as the political rhetoric has been during and since the 2008 election, sadly it’s surprising to me that something like this didn’t happen sooner.

The hateful words spoken by crowds at McCain / Palin rallies in 2008.  The absolute nonsense fear mongering over “death panels” during the 2009 health care debate.  The oft-repeated false canard of the country becoming Socialist.  The murder of George Tiller after hours upon hours of news coverage on FOX labeling him a child killer.  The shooter at the Holocaust Museum.  Several other instances in the past 2 years of gun & violence themed euphemisms from some very prominent Conservatives.  People arrogantly, ignorantly and irresponsibly bringing loaded weapons to political rallies.

The media, those that are supposed to be journalists, many of them did nothing to defuse or dispel the lies and the nonsense or call out those that were (and still are) telling these lies and spreading this message of hate, this goal of trying to split Americans across political lines.  Rather than encouraging people to sit and talk about their differences, these individuals would rather incite violence and sit back and rake in the money from the ratings they get from their lies.

While it’s true that it’s almost impossible to prove that any of these things directly caused Jared Loughner to snap and carry out this shameful act of violence, the fact remains that these items I’ve mentioned are none-the-less reckless and irresponsible.  Whether they cause people like that who are on the brink of mental health at best to trip over that edge does not matter.’

What matters is that we have a responsibility to each other to avoid saying things that are false, and contain violent rhetoric that could potentially push someone past the edge of reason. Bringing a gun to a political rally may be your legal right but that doesn’t mean you should.  Using gun-themed statements or targets in your political speeches or materials reeks of ignorance and hate.  Neither of these things are illegal, but they are reprehensible and irresponsible.

– “Left of Center”

Weekend Special Edition: Olbermann Wrong, MSNBC Overracted

Let’s get one thing out of the way to start. Keith Olbermann was wrong. Not for donating to Democratic candidates. He’s a private citizen, he used his money and did not directly endorse or recommend that anyone vote for any specific candidates on his program. No, he was wrong because he broke the rules outlined by his employer. As an employee of GE/NBC/MSNBC he is required to inform his employer of his choice to make campaign donations. He did not do this, so he was wrong.

Full disclosure, and in the interest of honesty and fairness. I’m a fan of Olbermann’s political commentary. Is he hyperbolic? At times. Is he sometimes divisive? Sure. Does he frequently report false information? No. Is he always trying to scare people to further his own agenda? Not unless you count trying to scare you with truthful information about what’s actually happening. The belief that he’s the Progressive “Liberal” mirror image of Bill O’Reilly is a shameful false equivalency.

I have watched Countdown & other MSNBC news commentary shows for years and cannot recall a time when something untrue was reported that was not corrected on a subsequent program. When you measure that against just Glenn Beck alone, the comparison is ridiculous. Add in Limbaugh, Malkin, Hannity, Palin, etc and the scale of truth is very heavily weighted in Olbermann & MSNBC’s favor.

That doesn’t change the fact that he was wrong. However, what is also true is that GE/NBC was more wrong. Requiring employees to essentially get permission from your boss before making a private political donation with your own personal money, while apparently not illegal, perhaps should be. What business is it of your employers what you do with your money? Even for news station’s television personalities, why should your employer have the right to know where that money is going? Their policy is wrong and overreaching.

Setting even that aside, suspending the very popular host of your number one show indefinitely without pay? Despite the fact that he was wrong, that’s really an extreme response. Certainly they want to make it clear to the public that the common comparison of MSNBC to FOX “News” is a fiction, but suspending someone indefinitely without pay for what, from the information that has been released, is a first offense is an extreme overstep and is likely to hurt the viewers opinion with the network more than it will help.

What’s worse is that, thanks to the SCOTUS “Citizens United” decision, we now live in a United States where NBC or another corporation can give unchecked, undisclosed millions to a campaign or candidate without any question but a private citizen cannot donate their own money without fearing reprisal should their employer dislike the candidate or campaign you’re donating to. I don’t know about you, my fellow Americans, but that’s not the way I want things to work in this country.

Update 11-07-10: MSNBC has confirmed Keith Olbermann will return to Countdown on Tuesday 11-09-10

– “Left of Center”

Decision 2010 Post-Mortem, Part III – Harry Reid Should Have Lost Badly

Image via Wikipedia

Primary season 2010.. Harry Reid (D-NV) was presumed to be critically wounded. Politically speaking, bleeding with sharks circling in the water. Unemployment in Nevada was (and still is) the highest in the country. Reid’s popularity, for factual or fictional reasons, was in the toilet.  Yet he will return to the United States Senate after a more than 5 point victory over Sharron Angle.  Why? Simply because Sharron Angle won the Republican Primary thanks to support from the fringe elements of the Republican TEA Party.

Sharron Angle had no chance to win the general election. Her campaign ads bordered on overt racism. She barely conducted any interviews. She ran from real questions and dodged reporters. In any normal election where there was not as much anger about the economy and other matters, she would have lost most embarrassingly. These factors instead resulted in her getting closer to national office than any American should be remotely comfortable with.

Had Harry Reid faced Sue Lowden, a Republican who made Sharron Angle look like a member of Mensa, he would likely have been soundly defeated. Instead, to the great pleasure of the Reid campaign, he faced Sharron Angle in the general election. Angle’s victory in the Republican Primary cemented a last-ditch reprieve of Harry Reid, allowing him to dodge the bullet of a political loss that was all but assured going into the start of the campaign.

– “Left of Center”

Decision 2010 Post-Mortem, Part I – Why Democrats Lost the House

Image by VJnet via Flickr

This one’s simple. The main reason was not something ridiculous like “a rejection of Obama’s far-left agenda”, though some will make this claim. They did this to themselves primarily through inaction. Nary a peep from any Democrats on what they have accomplished since the 2008 election.

Where were the fact-based attacks on Republicans for their loud calls to cut spending while still arguing for extending the Bush tax cuts at a cost of trillions? What about campaigning on the positively viewed individual items in the health-care bill? Calling Republicans out for talking about repeal of HCR that would return the power of companies to cancel your coverage once you get sick?

The growth of the GDP post-stimulus from a low point of -6% in January 2009 to a high point of +5% in January 2010? Not a peep.

Any talk about the significant progress in turning around the job numbers? Little to nothing.

Couple the Democrats almost complete unwillingness to actually campaign on their accomplishments with the mountains of cash from confidential donations and the barrage of false-hoods and outright lies from Republicans and it’s no surprise, even to this lifelong Democrat why, once again, Democrats have snatched a defeat from the jaws of victory.

– “Left of Center”

Valerie Jarrett Was Flat Wrong

Image via Wikipedia

One of President Obama’s Senior Advisors, Valerie Jarrett’s claim that Justin Aarberg made a “lifestyle choice” by being gay.  One could infer from this that she may believe that all LGBT Americans actually actively make a choice about who they are. If this is how she thinks, that is a very sad outdated viewpoint.

To anyone who thinks that homosexuals choose to be that way, there’s only one question that needs to be asked. Did you have to make a conscious choice to be straight? I know I didn’t, so it stands to reason logically that homosexuals clearly do not choose to be gay. The only choice they make is whether or not to be open about it. They choose if they want to live with the scorn, hatred, disrespect and possible physical harm that potentially comes with sharing the truth about who they are.

President Obama looks to this woman for advice. We are on the cusp of a time in this country where we’re starting to see the LGBT community gaining the civil rights they have been denied for so long. Because of this, Valerie Jarrett needs to be made to truly apologize for her remarks. A disingenuous apology for if her comments “offended anyone” or a calling of her statements “inartful” or “poorly chosen” will not do. If Valerie Jarrett truly believes that being gay is a choice, then she not only needs to apologize, but President Obama needs to demand her resignation immediately.

Injunction Against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”, Part II – The Reaction

 

Image via Wikipedia

 

Earlier, I covered the facts regarding “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and the Federal Judge’s ruling. Now let’s review what the predictable Conservative reaction will be. This one is too easy. The primary vector the Republican Tea Party and it’s associated talking heads will use will be nothing more than two words – “judicial activism”.  This very statement gives light to their sad and obvious irrational misunderstanding of how our Federal Government is structured.

As anyone who passed high school history (and/or government) class should have learned, there are three branches to our government. The Legislative Branch is comprised of the House of Representatives and the Senate. This body writes bills and votes on them. The Executive Branch – The President, Vice President and their respective cabinets and staff. Once Congress passes a bill, it’s sent to the President to be signed. Once the President signs the document, it is considered officially law.

Here’s where the Conservatives that constantly throw around the idea of “judicial activism”. The next branch of our government is the Judicial Branch. Their job is to review bills passed into law by the other two branches and decide based on the Constitution (and precedent set by previous rulings) if the items in question are legal! So when Conservatives whinge about “judicial activism”, they are protesting the fact that the Judicial Branch is doing it’s Constitutionally appointed duty!

So, despite that reality, individual Americans who subscribe to the Republican Tea Party mantra are under educated in matters of civics, political science will still echo the cries of “judicial activism” coming from the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, et al. What excuse do those individuals have? Do they not understand the function of the Judicial Branch any better, or are they intentionally ignoring the reality of their job for the purpose of making people afraid and angry? Has anyone else noticed that Conservatives only cry “judicial activism” when it’s a decision they don’t agree with, but they seem to have no complaints or concerns about the Citizen’s United decision?

– “Left of Center”

Federal Judge Rules Healthcare Bill Constitutional

 

Image via Wikipedia

 

Shortly after the passage of the “Affordable Health Care For America” act, several Attorneys General began efforts to have the law vacated or stayed on Constitutional grounds. Primarily, the point of contention was the Federal mandate that all Americans be required to purchase medical insurance of some kind.

These challenges are being turned away by Federal courts. One such incident occurred this weekend when Judge George Caram Steeh of Michigan ruled that Congress does indeed have the authority to create the “individual mandate”.

The judge ruled that Congress has this power under the Interstate Commerce Clause, because (from the ruling) “.. by choosing to forgo insurance, plaintiffs are making an economic decision to try to pay for health-care services later, out of pocket, rather than now through the purchase of insurance, collectively shifting billions of dollars . . . onto other market participants.”

As predicted by those that properly understand the Constitution the, “individual mandate” while unpleasant, is in fact legal because it imposes an additional penalty on an individual’s income tax if they do not purchase insurance. Congress, having the power to both “lay and collect taxes” and regulate Interstate commerce, are fully within their legal Constitutional authority to include such a requirement.

While other legal challenges have been vacated on technicalities, this is the first ruling that clearly states that the “individual mandate” provision is legal. This decision is likely to be precedent setting and, as a result, have an effect on other lawsuits being brought on the same grounds.

Once these baseless legal challenges are all defeated perhaps we can all come to an agreement in this country that the “Affordable Health Care For America” act is not an over-reach, but only the first small step toward getting medical care & insurance seen as a right rather than a privilege. We need to embrace the reality that we have much more work to do to draw even with all the other 1st world nations that already guarantee health & wellness coverage as a social responsibility rather than an emotional and financial burden that must be placed on the individual.

– “Left of Center”

Source: Washington Post

The Rachel Maddow Show: Democrats on Offense

 

Image via Wikipedia

 

A good breakdown of what it looks like when Democrats use Republicans extreme viewpoints against them and force them to backpedal and try to deny saying things despite there being clear evidence to the contrary.

The Rachel Maddow Show: Stop, Squirm & Run

– “Left of Center”