Somewhere in there, there's gotta be a theme!!
So, the fiscal cliff: it's a speed bump. I love how the media dramatizes everything. Even supposing (shocking, I know) that McConnell et al refuse to bargain and everything goes flushing, those cuts are phased in over FIVE YEARS. Five years. That's 1,825 days.
You're not gonna wake up and magically have your taxes raised and the economy in the toilet. It's available out there, folks - just read.
Republican obstruction: Like that's news? McConnell and the bunch need to realize that mid-terms are coming up and the American people (those who voted in this landslide election, remember??) are fed up with the divisive nature of politics. They're sick of seeing everything stuck because someone's having a hissy fit. So Prez Obama won a second term. Yes, he did, and yes I voted for him.
Y'all need to get over yourselves.
Yoga: I got to sub and teach my first yoga class last week!! How fun it was - and how nerve-wracking. I've been practicing for at least 7 years or so. But getting up in front? That was a bit scary. Luckily, the students took it easy on me and I had a practice that was fairly benign. No backbends; no pretzel poses.
I'm looking forward to teacher training in 2013 and hoping that after it's all done I have a place to teach. Just part-time. But I want to do this. I think I have something to offer.
Showing posts with label White House. Show all posts
Showing posts with label White House. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 14, 2012
Thursday, February 24, 2011
As Wisconsin Goes???
I've been following the Wisconsin story these past few days, and I am just amazed. Scott Walker seems intent upon stripping unions of any power. The Democrats, known as "The Wisconsin 14," have fled the state to prevent a final vote on this, and Walker is sending out state troopers to see if he can fish at least one of 'em back.
I think that he's not getting it. He's telling a faux-Koch -- the radio prankster who managed to get him to admit that he pretty much will not negotiate and that he's going to bust the unions - that his plan all along has been to cripple the unions. He actually said he "thought about" bringing in outside agitators. He also said that he'd talked with other lawmakers about this. Sorry, but this is union busting, a textbook plan to bust a union. He's not willing to negotiate. It's his way or the highway. They elected him (and I'm not sure why) as GOVERNOR, and not God. From the faux-Koch interview, it clearly seems like Walker has a plan - nay, a plot. It's much more subversive than a "plan" because he's wanting to rip out the bedrock of Wisconsin and the entire Rust Belt. I hope to heaven that someone acts on that phone call.
And he also said, which I find incomprehensible given the recent coverage, that "[all the protestors] were from out of state and the people of Wisconsin were getting tired of all the disruption." Really? He thinks they're all on his side? The teachers protesting; the state employees protesting; the average WI citizens protesting? They don't look like they like his idea much at all.
The talking heads on Fox are calling for violence. But if you've seen the coverage so far, the demonstrations are bringing out the best in people; they've been peaceful. Loud, yes. But that's the point, seeing as the governor can't quite hear what they're saying since he's decided that the decision is his alone. The talking heads, if they have you in their snare, turned a Gallup poll on its head. The recent poll said that 63% of Americans were behind the Wisconsin union members. But blatantly in Fox News' reports, they say, "A full 63% of Americans do not support the unions in Wisconsin." Really? I know how to read a pie chart. And it didn't look like that to me. I've got lots of education and I can tell when there's a majority opinion about something. And Gallup isn't exactly new at this. But there you have it. Spin this enough and up is down. The sky is sideways. Inside is outside.
Use your brains, people! Unions brought you regulations that have made your lives easier: the 5-day work week; vacations; basic workplace standards that keep workers safe. And you know what else they did? Unions brought you worker standards. Yes, worker standards are those things that tell you that when you hire a plumber, he or she has knowledge of the trade; he or she has been trained as an apprentice; he or she has put time into learning the trade. And he or she won't screw up your plumbing! What's that worth to you? It's worth plenty to me, since one son is in the trades, and I'd kind of like to see him in a safe environment when he's working. And I'd like him to make a living wage and be able to not work in a sweatshop.
In full disclosure, my dad and grandpa were in the union. My father-in-law was a union man as well. My youngest son is thisclose to being a teacher (will graduate in May) and I have friends who are teachers who are also in a union. My mother was part of the union when she worked, and her very tiny pension comes from that membership.
So I think that Walker isn't getting the message. He's not seeing the Democrat walk-out for what it is. They're making the point that the government, which is supposedly for the people, is not listening - at least in Wisconsin AND in Indiana now - to what the people want. And someone ought to remind Walker that he's not supposed to use the State Troopers to fish back the Democrats. The State Troopers can't be used in "labor disputes" nor in "political issues." This is so clearly a political issue - it's all Kabuki theatre in Wisconsin, and he is, in my opinion, violating the trust of the citizens of Wisconsin. He's sending Troopers out to get the Dems, but there are people who need the resources of the Troopers - to solve crimes and help them. Don't you think? Let them do their jobs, and keep them out of your farcical political games.
The thing is this: teachers do not make $100,000+ a year. When you see this figure, you just see lots of zeros. What you don't see is that the basic salary of a teacher is about $50,ooo and the benefits are tacked on. Just like my salary: I make about $44,000 a year, but since I work at a university, I do get a tuition benefit. On paper, if you just look at the bottom line, I make about $68,000. But if you take out that tuition benefit, my actual salary is much less.
At that, that $50,000 is not a lot of money when you think of what a teacher does. As my kids were growing up, we often found that teachers supplemented their salaries by coaching teams, and they often had to provide basic classroom supplies out of their own pockets. My son has 2 interviews scheduled. His base salary will be in the range of $30,000 per year. That's less than the 2009 median income, according to the US Census. Check out the data at the following site: http://www.census.gov/ and see for yourself. The 2009 median income for a male wage-earner is $47,127.
The more education he gets, the better that salary will be. I paid for his BA. He's on his own for his MA and beyond. And let me tell you, the cost per credit hour for a Master's degree can be $700+ and each class is 3 credit hours. So let's just estimate: you're looking at $2,100 per class. There are 39 hours required for a basic Master's program. So, $2,100 x 39 = $81,900. For a degree. He's not going to get that for free. He's got to pay for that.
And while paying for that, he's got to work. Teaching kids.
I'm listening to a radio program, and one of the Wisconsin Democrats is speaking. He's saying that the protestors are mothers and fathers, teachers, social workers, working people. Those Democrats who've walked out - they're paying for their expenses out of their own pockets. And Walker says that he's going to hold their paychecks.
If Walker succeeds in busting the union here, it'll flow outward through the entire Rust Belt. It's not always about balancing the budget. He's not willing to discuss any of this with the Democrats. No negotiations. If he balances the budget, it doesn't mean that he must bust the union. It's just that busting the unions is a Republican agenda item. Unions traditionally support Democrats.
So how best to turn the 2012 elections? Cut off the best source of funding to the Democrats: the union folks.
The thing is, I think (and I'm praying) that this will fly back into Walker's face like bacon grease out of a hot pan. Unions built this country. Yes, there are corrupt unions. Like there aren't corrupt businesses funding the Republicans?? Please. The unions haven't asked for bail-outs, and as a matter of fact, the teachers in WI had already given back pay concessions and other concessions in the form of some of their benefits.
But Walker won't budge. It's his way: bust it up. No other way.
This should scare the rest of us in the Rust Belt. And it should make us mad. We can't contribute to the expenses of the Wisconsin 14. But we can participate in local solidarity events. We can donate to the campaign funds of the Wisconsin 14. We can write letters and make our own voices heard. I'm not in a union. But my father's union benefits provided medical, vision and dental care for 4 kids. My father's union benefits provided us decent wages for him, because at the time I was growing up, my mother worked as a school secretary for $1.75 per hour. Yeah, a buck-seventy-five. And no benefits. The union membership in her case didn't come till later, when she went to work for a community college and some administrative positions were covered under the teachers' union.
But you know what we really need? Someone in DC to come out and call this what it is. Obama or Biden must speak up, quickly. I absolutely realize that the right wing nut jobs on Fox or other stations will have a field day with that. But good grief: the man is President (or Vice President as the case may be) and Biden especially - he has campaigned on the fact that he was a "Regular Joe." So, Joe. Come on out to the Midwest. You've been a New England resident; our winter's not over, but it's not something that should freak you out.
I'm issuing an invitation: come out and support the people who got you elected. Before it's too late. I'm tellin' ya: 2012 is right around the corner. Come out now, while you're needed.
I think that he's not getting it. He's telling a faux-Koch -- the radio prankster who managed to get him to admit that he pretty much will not negotiate and that he's going to bust the unions - that his plan all along has been to cripple the unions. He actually said he "thought about" bringing in outside agitators. He also said that he'd talked with other lawmakers about this. Sorry, but this is union busting, a textbook plan to bust a union. He's not willing to negotiate. It's his way or the highway. They elected him (and I'm not sure why) as GOVERNOR, and not God. From the faux-Koch interview, it clearly seems like Walker has a plan - nay, a plot. It's much more subversive than a "plan" because he's wanting to rip out the bedrock of Wisconsin and the entire Rust Belt. I hope to heaven that someone acts on that phone call.
And he also said, which I find incomprehensible given the recent coverage, that "[all the protestors] were from out of state and the people of Wisconsin were getting tired of all the disruption." Really? He thinks they're all on his side? The teachers protesting; the state employees protesting; the average WI citizens protesting? They don't look like they like his idea much at all.
The talking heads on Fox are calling for violence. But if you've seen the coverage so far, the demonstrations are bringing out the best in people; they've been peaceful. Loud, yes. But that's the point, seeing as the governor can't quite hear what they're saying since he's decided that the decision is his alone. The talking heads, if they have you in their snare, turned a Gallup poll on its head. The recent poll said that 63% of Americans were behind the Wisconsin union members. But blatantly in Fox News' reports, they say, "A full 63% of Americans do not support the unions in Wisconsin." Really? I know how to read a pie chart. And it didn't look like that to me. I've got lots of education and I can tell when there's a majority opinion about something. And Gallup isn't exactly new at this. But there you have it. Spin this enough and up is down. The sky is sideways. Inside is outside.
Use your brains, people! Unions brought you regulations that have made your lives easier: the 5-day work week; vacations; basic workplace standards that keep workers safe. And you know what else they did? Unions brought you worker standards. Yes, worker standards are those things that tell you that when you hire a plumber, he or she has knowledge of the trade; he or she has been trained as an apprentice; he or she has put time into learning the trade. And he or she won't screw up your plumbing! What's that worth to you? It's worth plenty to me, since one son is in the trades, and I'd kind of like to see him in a safe environment when he's working. And I'd like him to make a living wage and be able to not work in a sweatshop.
In full disclosure, my dad and grandpa were in the union. My father-in-law was a union man as well. My youngest son is thisclose to being a teacher (will graduate in May) and I have friends who are teachers who are also in a union. My mother was part of the union when she worked, and her very tiny pension comes from that membership.
So I think that Walker isn't getting the message. He's not seeing the Democrat walk-out for what it is. They're making the point that the government, which is supposedly for the people, is not listening - at least in Wisconsin AND in Indiana now - to what the people want. And someone ought to remind Walker that he's not supposed to use the State Troopers to fish back the Democrats. The State Troopers can't be used in "labor disputes" nor in "political issues." This is so clearly a political issue - it's all Kabuki theatre in Wisconsin, and he is, in my opinion, violating the trust of the citizens of Wisconsin. He's sending Troopers out to get the Dems, but there are people who need the resources of the Troopers - to solve crimes and help them. Don't you think? Let them do their jobs, and keep them out of your farcical political games.
The thing is this: teachers do not make $100,000+ a year. When you see this figure, you just see lots of zeros. What you don't see is that the basic salary of a teacher is about $50,ooo and the benefits are tacked on. Just like my salary: I make about $44,000 a year, but since I work at a university, I do get a tuition benefit. On paper, if you just look at the bottom line, I make about $68,000. But if you take out that tuition benefit, my actual salary is much less.
At that, that $50,000 is not a lot of money when you think of what a teacher does. As my kids were growing up, we often found that teachers supplemented their salaries by coaching teams, and they often had to provide basic classroom supplies out of their own pockets. My son has 2 interviews scheduled. His base salary will be in the range of $30,000 per year. That's less than the 2009 median income, according to the US Census. Check out the data at the following site: http://www.census.gov/ and see for yourself. The 2009 median income for a male wage-earner is $47,127.
The more education he gets, the better that salary will be. I paid for his BA. He's on his own for his MA and beyond. And let me tell you, the cost per credit hour for a Master's degree can be $700+ and each class is 3 credit hours. So let's just estimate: you're looking at $2,100 per class. There are 39 hours required for a basic Master's program. So, $2,100 x 39 = $81,900. For a degree. He's not going to get that for free. He's got to pay for that.
And while paying for that, he's got to work. Teaching kids.
I'm listening to a radio program, and one of the Wisconsin Democrats is speaking. He's saying that the protestors are mothers and fathers, teachers, social workers, working people. Those Democrats who've walked out - they're paying for their expenses out of their own pockets. And Walker says that he's going to hold their paychecks.
If Walker succeeds in busting the union here, it'll flow outward through the entire Rust Belt. It's not always about balancing the budget. He's not willing to discuss any of this with the Democrats. No negotiations. If he balances the budget, it doesn't mean that he must bust the union. It's just that busting the unions is a Republican agenda item. Unions traditionally support Democrats.
So how best to turn the 2012 elections? Cut off the best source of funding to the Democrats: the union folks.
The thing is, I think (and I'm praying) that this will fly back into Walker's face like bacon grease out of a hot pan. Unions built this country. Yes, there are corrupt unions. Like there aren't corrupt businesses funding the Republicans?? Please. The unions haven't asked for bail-outs, and as a matter of fact, the teachers in WI had already given back pay concessions and other concessions in the form of some of their benefits.
But Walker won't budge. It's his way: bust it up. No other way.
This should scare the rest of us in the Rust Belt. And it should make us mad. We can't contribute to the expenses of the Wisconsin 14. But we can participate in local solidarity events. We can donate to the campaign funds of the Wisconsin 14. We can write letters and make our own voices heard. I'm not in a union. But my father's union benefits provided medical, vision and dental care for 4 kids. My father's union benefits provided us decent wages for him, because at the time I was growing up, my mother worked as a school secretary for $1.75 per hour. Yeah, a buck-seventy-five. And no benefits. The union membership in her case didn't come till later, when she went to work for a community college and some administrative positions were covered under the teachers' union.
But you know what we really need? Someone in DC to come out and call this what it is. Obama or Biden must speak up, quickly. I absolutely realize that the right wing nut jobs on Fox or other stations will have a field day with that. But good grief: the man is President (or Vice President as the case may be) and Biden especially - he has campaigned on the fact that he was a "Regular Joe." So, Joe. Come on out to the Midwest. You've been a New England resident; our winter's not over, but it's not something that should freak you out.
I'm issuing an invitation: come out and support the people who got you elected. Before it's too late. I'm tellin' ya: 2012 is right around the corner. Come out now, while you're needed.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Do You Want to Go Back or Go Forward?
See, I'm having a problem. I'm having a problem with the budget discussions. On both sides, actually.
I don't want to see the heating program cut; and I don't want the block grant program cut. I don't like that the social services programs are being cut.
And I don't like what I see from the Republican side either - driving us to the brink of disaster with their push to privatize Social Security and slash Medicare and Medicaid.
Frankly, I'd be perfectly happy to see the public arts programs cut for now. Nobody has ever died because of lack of art. But the nearly-50-million uninsured Americans? They're not looking too good lately.
The retirees? Social Security isn't the budget-buster. It's solvent. Really. Look it up. Why do you want to rob from the seniors, who've paid their dues, to give it to corporations and the military? The uber-rich will gain from this, not the people like my mother and my mother-in-law.
Balanced budget? Yep, we do need that. But here's the thing. It's really, REALLY basic math.
The uber-rich and the corporations slide because they're getting massive --- and I mean massive tax breaks. Last year, ExxonMobil paid NO taxes. But they had one of their greatest earnings years ever. The loopholes were so big that you could've driven an oil tanker through them, but given Exxon's history, I would want to know who's driving that particular vehicle!
Do you want to slash programs that cut jobs, but then give rewards to corporations for them to outsource those jobs? That's what's happening. And Obama just gave a plum position in his administration to a well-known outsourcer-extraordinaire. Lovely.
Obama really needs to do what he said he was going to do: Stand up for the people who got him into office. He's playing with fire when playing with the Republicans who want two things: To show that the black guy in the White House will fail; and to take ultimate control to toss us all under the bus. Any of us who are middle-class? We're Republican toast. Our retirements are at stake. What do you want to do when you retire? I'm not talking "retiring to a vineyard in Napa." I'm talking "affordable retirement where I don't have to worry about buying food versus paying other bills." That's pretty basic. That's why I'm working; that's why my Hubby is working. To have a pay-off at the end of our working lives where we can relax and not have to be greeters at the local Big Box when we're 80. If we can get that job...
Do I know the answer? Well, I have an idea, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who's looking at the same thing. It's just that I have no power. I have the power of the pen - which isn't what it used to be, quite frankly, and I have the power of my vote. I think. Not so sure about that lately, since my President has morphed into something I'm not sure I like.
Here's my take. Tax the rich at an equitable level. No, don't ask them what's equitable, because they like the huge slice of the pie they already have. An equitable level as determined mathematically through a review of what everyone makes. Average that number and then determine an appropriate tax rate for those whose incomes are over a certain number. I don't know the number. I just know that if I'm making $250,000+, I can be sure that I'll pay way less than someone making $100,000 or less. Because I'll have someone who knows where to stash that income to make it look like I'm making less than that $250,000. Come on, you can afford it, particularly if your income is quite far past that $250,000 number.
And corporations. They are not people. They do not deserve the same rights as a person. A corporation is not a sentient being, and thus does not have the same Constitutional right. It can change overnight into something else. I will always be a human. No changing here, except I'll get older. A corporation can change into another corporation; can divest itself of assets to appear to be something it isn't; can merge or acquire different businesses to change its assets and give better benefits to their stockholders. I can't do that as a human. I can marry, but that doesn't mean that I can change my basic being. Which is what can happen with a corporation.
So don't give them the same rights as a person. And hold them accountable to the cities and states in which they do business. Don't give them tax breaks to send jobs away from Americans. And don't tell me there are cheaper workers overseas. I get the whole "global corporate environment" thing, but when I see jobs going overseas, I don't see the same reciprocity... The countries who are taking those jobs aren't exactly supporting America. They're supporting their families, true. But since America has pretty much ceased making anything anyone wants to buy - the overseas workers are incapable of supporting us in any meaningful way. This is a one-way street, and we're in the headlights of the oncoming traffic.
In the last 10 years, we have lost over 50,000 factories in the US. Millions of jobs. And it's harder and harder to find products manufactured here. But again, we're also giving people who WANT to build and manufacture here a load of crap - we're not allowing them to do it easily. If you read Bloomberg Business Week you can see stories about manufacturers who are apologizing for having to go to China or another country because the US has made it virtually unprofitable to set up a factory here. A solar-battery manufacturer wanted to build a plant in the Carolinas. But by the time he got through the red tape and other hoops and chutes and ladders -- it was cheaper to go to China. He would like to come to America - at some point. And he's disappointed that he wasn't able to start a factory here. To give a US-made, relevant product to the American consumer and to provide sustainable jobs to American citizens.
What are we headed toward? I'm not sure and I'm frightened. I think we need a counter-revolution of the Liberal kind. The Conservatives are determined to flush the middle class and lower class down into the sewer, all to enrich their cronies. I don't like the idea of being flushed.
I hope you agree.
I don't want to see the heating program cut; and I don't want the block grant program cut. I don't like that the social services programs are being cut.
And I don't like what I see from the Republican side either - driving us to the brink of disaster with their push to privatize Social Security and slash Medicare and Medicaid.
Frankly, I'd be perfectly happy to see the public arts programs cut for now. Nobody has ever died because of lack of art. But the nearly-50-million uninsured Americans? They're not looking too good lately.
The retirees? Social Security isn't the budget-buster. It's solvent. Really. Look it up. Why do you want to rob from the seniors, who've paid their dues, to give it to corporations and the military? The uber-rich will gain from this, not the people like my mother and my mother-in-law.
Balanced budget? Yep, we do need that. But here's the thing. It's really, REALLY basic math.
The uber-rich and the corporations slide because they're getting massive --- and I mean massive tax breaks. Last year, ExxonMobil paid NO taxes. But they had one of their greatest earnings years ever. The loopholes were so big that you could've driven an oil tanker through them, but given Exxon's history, I would want to know who's driving that particular vehicle!
Do you want to slash programs that cut jobs, but then give rewards to corporations for them to outsource those jobs? That's what's happening. And Obama just gave a plum position in his administration to a well-known outsourcer-extraordinaire. Lovely.
Obama really needs to do what he said he was going to do: Stand up for the people who got him into office. He's playing with fire when playing with the Republicans who want two things: To show that the black guy in the White House will fail; and to take ultimate control to toss us all under the bus. Any of us who are middle-class? We're Republican toast. Our retirements are at stake. What do you want to do when you retire? I'm not talking "retiring to a vineyard in Napa." I'm talking "affordable retirement where I don't have to worry about buying food versus paying other bills." That's pretty basic. That's why I'm working; that's why my Hubby is working. To have a pay-off at the end of our working lives where we can relax and not have to be greeters at the local Big Box when we're 80. If we can get that job...
Do I know the answer? Well, I have an idea, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who's looking at the same thing. It's just that I have no power. I have the power of the pen - which isn't what it used to be, quite frankly, and I have the power of my vote. I think. Not so sure about that lately, since my President has morphed into something I'm not sure I like.
Here's my take. Tax the rich at an equitable level. No, don't ask them what's equitable, because they like the huge slice of the pie they already have. An equitable level as determined mathematically through a review of what everyone makes. Average that number and then determine an appropriate tax rate for those whose incomes are over a certain number. I don't know the number. I just know that if I'm making $250,000+, I can be sure that I'll pay way less than someone making $100,000 or less. Because I'll have someone who knows where to stash that income to make it look like I'm making less than that $250,000. Come on, you can afford it, particularly if your income is quite far past that $250,000 number.
And corporations. They are not people. They do not deserve the same rights as a person. A corporation is not a sentient being, and thus does not have the same Constitutional right. It can change overnight into something else. I will always be a human. No changing here, except I'll get older. A corporation can change into another corporation; can divest itself of assets to appear to be something it isn't; can merge or acquire different businesses to change its assets and give better benefits to their stockholders. I can't do that as a human. I can marry, but that doesn't mean that I can change my basic being. Which is what can happen with a corporation.
So don't give them the same rights as a person. And hold them accountable to the cities and states in which they do business. Don't give them tax breaks to send jobs away from Americans. And don't tell me there are cheaper workers overseas. I get the whole "global corporate environment" thing, but when I see jobs going overseas, I don't see the same reciprocity... The countries who are taking those jobs aren't exactly supporting America. They're supporting their families, true. But since America has pretty much ceased making anything anyone wants to buy - the overseas workers are incapable of supporting us in any meaningful way. This is a one-way street, and we're in the headlights of the oncoming traffic.
In the last 10 years, we have lost over 50,000 factories in the US. Millions of jobs. And it's harder and harder to find products manufactured here. But again, we're also giving people who WANT to build and manufacture here a load of crap - we're not allowing them to do it easily. If you read Bloomberg Business Week you can see stories about manufacturers who are apologizing for having to go to China or another country because the US has made it virtually unprofitable to set up a factory here. A solar-battery manufacturer wanted to build a plant in the Carolinas. But by the time he got through the red tape and other hoops and chutes and ladders -- it was cheaper to go to China. He would like to come to America - at some point. And he's disappointed that he wasn't able to start a factory here. To give a US-made, relevant product to the American consumer and to provide sustainable jobs to American citizens.
What are we headed toward? I'm not sure and I'm frightened. I think we need a counter-revolution of the Liberal kind. The Conservatives are determined to flush the middle class and lower class down into the sewer, all to enrich their cronies. I don't like the idea of being flushed.
I hope you agree.
Saturday, February 12, 2011
Strict Constructionalism Until It's Not Convenient...
So a recent report from Fox News shows that Republicans involved in the upcoming Iowa Caucus do have some pressing things on their mind for the 2012 election.
Let's see. We're at war. In two places. Our economy is growing slowly, but our undergraduates are still having trouble finding jobs. Real estate markets are moving - not sure in which direction - at a snail's pace, with more homeowners "under water" than there really should be, given the fact that the government bailed out those financial institutions. Who are holding on to the bail-out funds to give their own execs a bonus, or increase their bottom lines for the benefit of their stockholders.
That's a good start, right?
Nope. They're worried because President Barack Obama is "hiding the truth" that he's really not a Christian, in spite of more assertions than there would be if the guy was white...Let's call it what it is, folks. And that -- oh my.... He's MUSLIM. Except for the fact that he's not.
So, most of those folks consider themselves "strict constructionalists" of the US Constitution. Therefore, using logic (and it won't hurt, I promise), they should be pretty clear about Article Six and its obvious meaning.
Article VI of the United States Constitution: (only the 3rd paragraph is relevant here, so I'll skip all that extra typing)
The Senators and Representatives, before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
Can you read that, or shall I break it down? Oh, heck. I'll break it down. It's more fun.
Senators, legislators and any public elected official, including the judiciary, must take an oath to support the Constituiton. They do that, albeit they don't have a standard oath, as that was deemed a "test" and thus a violation. So, Congress may include "so help me God," but an individual may choose not to say the words. If you were to require the person to say them, that's a religious test.
The current oath is: I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreigh and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. (So help me God.)
Kennedy had to deal with the whole "religious test" thing because people were worried that "Rome would be running the country." John Kerry actually put this issue to rest in his own campaign, by saying (I'm paraphrasing) basicially, "I was elected by many people of many beliefs. My own beliefs are my own. I was elected to do the will of the people, and that doesn't mean just the Catholic people. It means all the people in my district."
The religious test issue was brought up again in the 110th United States Congress, when Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to the US Congress (Minnesota's 5th Congressional District) said he was going to use a Qu'ran for his swearing in. Funny thing - he used the Qu'ran that was once owned by Thomas Jefferson. Remember him??
The US Congress does not officially swear anyone in using any holy book. It's an en mass swearing in, and any other ceremonies using a holy book are strictly private.
So. We're back at President Obama. The guy has affirmed - multiple times - that he's a Christian. He's proven that he was born here. Don't go there, he was born here. Ask the Governor of Hawaii - he was there. And if you remember, he was sworn in using Abraham Lincoln's bible. Remember him? The greatest Republican president ever, some say.
There is no religious test. Obama doesn't have to prove, to anyone, any further, that he's a Christian. Because according to our own Constitution, he can be a Druid, a Wiccan or an atheist.
Our country was not founded as a Christian nation.
Behaving "as a Christian" is seen as behaving with good will toward all. Those folks in Iowa are somehow not focusing on the greater good. They're not focusing on the millions in our own country who go to bed hungry, or have no home, or have no job. They're not focusing on the 47 million + who are uninsured. They're not focusing on the country's incredibly enormous debt, and how that'll affect our children's children's children.
They're focusing on a non-issue fanned into flame by a non-news station.
I guess they've got nothing better to look at in Iowa. The 2012 election cycle is going to be interesting. The strict constructionalists are only "strict" when it serves them; otherwise, it seems they're perfectly content to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Unaware that the baby they're tossing out, our Constitution, is the one that belongs to all of us. Not just to them.
Let's see. We're at war. In two places. Our economy is growing slowly, but our undergraduates are still having trouble finding jobs. Real estate markets are moving - not sure in which direction - at a snail's pace, with more homeowners "under water" than there really should be, given the fact that the government bailed out those financial institutions. Who are holding on to the bail-out funds to give their own execs a bonus, or increase their bottom lines for the benefit of their stockholders.
That's a good start, right?
Nope. They're worried because President Barack Obama is "hiding the truth" that he's really not a Christian, in spite of more assertions than there would be if the guy was white...Let's call it what it is, folks. And that -- oh my.... He's MUSLIM. Except for the fact that he's not.
So, most of those folks consider themselves "strict constructionalists" of the US Constitution. Therefore, using logic (and it won't hurt, I promise), they should be pretty clear about Article Six and its obvious meaning.
Article VI of the United States Constitution: (only the 3rd paragraph is relevant here, so I'll skip all that extra typing)
The Senators and Representatives, before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
Can you read that, or shall I break it down? Oh, heck. I'll break it down. It's more fun.
Senators, legislators and any public elected official, including the judiciary, must take an oath to support the Constituiton. They do that, albeit they don't have a standard oath, as that was deemed a "test" and thus a violation. So, Congress may include "so help me God," but an individual may choose not to say the words. If you were to require the person to say them, that's a religious test.
The current oath is: I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreigh and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. (So help me God.)
Kennedy had to deal with the whole "religious test" thing because people were worried that "Rome would be running the country." John Kerry actually put this issue to rest in his own campaign, by saying (I'm paraphrasing) basicially, "I was elected by many people of many beliefs. My own beliefs are my own. I was elected to do the will of the people, and that doesn't mean just the Catholic people. It means all the people in my district."
The religious test issue was brought up again in the 110th United States Congress, when Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to the US Congress (Minnesota's 5th Congressional District) said he was going to use a Qu'ran for his swearing in. Funny thing - he used the Qu'ran that was once owned by Thomas Jefferson. Remember him??
The US Congress does not officially swear anyone in using any holy book. It's an en mass swearing in, and any other ceremonies using a holy book are strictly private.
So. We're back at President Obama. The guy has affirmed - multiple times - that he's a Christian. He's proven that he was born here. Don't go there, he was born here. Ask the Governor of Hawaii - he was there. And if you remember, he was sworn in using Abraham Lincoln's bible. Remember him? The greatest Republican president ever, some say.
There is no religious test. Obama doesn't have to prove, to anyone, any further, that he's a Christian. Because according to our own Constitution, he can be a Druid, a Wiccan or an atheist.
Our country was not founded as a Christian nation.
Behaving "as a Christian" is seen as behaving with good will toward all. Those folks in Iowa are somehow not focusing on the greater good. They're not focusing on the millions in our own country who go to bed hungry, or have no home, or have no job. They're not focusing on the 47 million + who are uninsured. They're not focusing on the country's incredibly enormous debt, and how that'll affect our children's children's children.
They're focusing on a non-issue fanned into flame by a non-news station.
I guess they've got nothing better to look at in Iowa. The 2012 election cycle is going to be interesting. The strict constructionalists are only "strict" when it serves them; otherwise, it seems they're perfectly content to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Unaware that the baby they're tossing out, our Constitution, is the one that belongs to all of us. Not just to them.
Wednesday, November 03, 2010
Pardon the "F" bombs....
...but I share (and applaud) the basic sentiment of this blogger.
http://www.timwise.org/2010/11/an-open-letter-to-the-white-right-on-the-occasion-of-your-recent-successful-temper-tantrum/
I am amazed at how many people shared in the Kool-aid fest of the past election cycle. Why such enormous numbers voted in opposition to their own rational self-interest is beyond me. Those who didn't vote? Well, y'all got the results you deserve. I hope you're happy.
And for those who couldn't be bothered to research exactly WHAT that reactionary candidate of yours really stood for; who couldn't be bothered to THINK about what you were doing when you were in the voting booth? You, too, got what you deserved. I hope you're happy.
In the end, though, it comes down to this: We need to work together. And that's not an empty campaign phrase. We need to demand of our elected officials that they do what they were elected to do. And I'm hoping that what these people were elected to do was WORK, and not just "say no" to everything that the black guy in the White House proposes.
Because that would be sad. This country needs lots of work to make it work... to keep US working. To keep our country prospering so that our kids and grand-kids have a future. If there is continual gridlock in DC and all that happens is that social service programs get cut, then we will have proven ourselves to NOT be the Greatest Nation. We will have proven ourselves to be bullies - who cut important services to the most vulnerable in our population and who are ruled by the Corporatocracy that has been given the right by our Supreme Court to buy elections.
That's not the America that my great-grandparents came over to live in. Do I want to go "back"?? No. Do I think our country needs to be "taken back"? Taken back from what?? We need to go FORWARD. And we can only do that if we stop hollering at each other and work together. It's not pie-in-the-sky idealism. It's rational, cold-hearted truth. You get nothing done by doing nothing.
http://www.timwise.org/2010/11/an-open-letter-to-the-white-right-on-the-occasion-of-your-recent-successful-temper-tantrum/
I am amazed at how many people shared in the Kool-aid fest of the past election cycle. Why such enormous numbers voted in opposition to their own rational self-interest is beyond me. Those who didn't vote? Well, y'all got the results you deserve. I hope you're happy.
And for those who couldn't be bothered to research exactly WHAT that reactionary candidate of yours really stood for; who couldn't be bothered to THINK about what you were doing when you were in the voting booth? You, too, got what you deserved. I hope you're happy.
In the end, though, it comes down to this: We need to work together. And that's not an empty campaign phrase. We need to demand of our elected officials that they do what they were elected to do. And I'm hoping that what these people were elected to do was WORK, and not just "say no" to everything that the black guy in the White House proposes.
Because that would be sad. This country needs lots of work to make it work... to keep US working. To keep our country prospering so that our kids and grand-kids have a future. If there is continual gridlock in DC and all that happens is that social service programs get cut, then we will have proven ourselves to NOT be the Greatest Nation. We will have proven ourselves to be bullies - who cut important services to the most vulnerable in our population and who are ruled by the Corporatocracy that has been given the right by our Supreme Court to buy elections.
That's not the America that my great-grandparents came over to live in. Do I want to go "back"?? No. Do I think our country needs to be "taken back"? Taken back from what?? We need to go FORWARD. And we can only do that if we stop hollering at each other and work together. It's not pie-in-the-sky idealism. It's rational, cold-hearted truth. You get nothing done by doing nothing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)