Face the Facts: Coal Kills

President Obama is taking long-overdue steps to limit emissions from coal power plants. Republicans say they are against such limits for economic reasons. Who’s right? Let’s look at the facts:

The coal industry and their lobbyists funnel millions into GOP campaign coffers (1,2).

Coal, the most carbon-intensive fuel, is the world’s leading source of energy-related CO2 emissions (3). Even if we ignore the long-term damage coal does to the earth’s climate, coal emissions cause health problems that lead to 13,000 U.S. deaths each year (4).

Anyone who denies the scientific consensus on man-made climate change is a liar or a fool. Scientists say, "Scientific evidence for warming of the climate system is unequivocal." (5)

Protecting the environment used to be and still should be a bipartisan issue. Republican Teddy Roosevelt was a founder of the conservation movement, and Richard Nixon signed the Environmental Protection Act. A handful of Republicans are trying to reverse their party’s foolishness (6).

(1) http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=E1210

(2) http://www.nationaljournal.com/domesticpolicy/coal-industry-s-new-voice-in-washington-is-deeply-rooted-in-republican-politics-20121106

(3) http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/ieo/emissions.cfm

(4) http://www.catf.us/fossil/problems/power_plants/existing/  

(5) http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence

(6) http://conservamerica.org/

The True Cost of Military Spending

If we, the people of the United States want to cut our federal budget, we need to start with military spending. We spend much, much more than any other country. In fact, the U.S. could cut our military budget in half and still spend twice what China spends and four times what Russia spends (1).

We spend too much defending (and sometimes invading) other countries. We need to spend less, bring our troops home, and mind our own business.

We should follow the advice of our country’s first great military leader and first president. In his farewell address in 1796, George Washington encouraged an isolationist policy.  Washington warned that we should not “entangle our peace and prosperity” with those of other nations because such entanglements would endanger our own liberty:  

Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. …

But, if I may even flatter myself that they (these words) may be productive of some partial benefit, some occasional good; that they may now and then recur to moderate the fury of party spirit, to warn against the mischiefs of foreign intrigue, to guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism... (2)

Another great general-turned-president, Dwight D. Eisenhower, famously warned against the potential abuse of power by the military-industrial complex (a term he coined):

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. (3)

But Eisenhower, who had planned and overseen the Allied liberation of Europe in WWII, also warned against the cost of military spending:

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement. We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people. (4)

As Washington and Eisenhower foresaw, the U.S. cannot afford to be the world’s policeman.

1. http://www.globalissues.org/article/75/world-military-spending#InContextUSMilitarySpendingVersusRestoftheWorld

2.: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/washing.asp

3.  http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/d/dwight_d_eisenhower.html#p4pgKljCEEofEW9Q.99

4. http://unsettledchristianity.com/2011/04/eisenhower-on-the-opportunity-cost-of-defense-spending/

Image: http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/military_spending_big.png

Evangelicals Question Conservative Agenda

Finally, Evangelical Christians—sometimes called “values voters”—are coming to realize that much of the conservative Republican agenda is at odds with Christian values.

In the Christian Science Monitor, Anna Clark writes:

A recent Pew study found that 57 percent of Evangelicals feel “Government should do more to help needy Americans, even if it means going deeper into debt.”

Rising sea levels and rising frustration with the GOP’s failure to protect the environment also mean that the evangelical vote is no longer necessarily a sure thing for Republicans. According to Pew, the majority of Evangelicals now believe that “stricter environmental laws and regulations are worth the cost.” (1)

Evangelical groups are also weighing in on the immigration issue. The Christian Science Monitor reports:

Although most Americans associate theologically conservative Christians with cultural issues such as abortion and gay marriage, the evangelical political agenda is broadening. Immigration reform is one issue that has steadily gained momentum.

What might account for this change?

For one, pastors and religious leaders are talking more about the issue as a religious concern. Many scriptural passages relate to immigration – including the famous 40-year wilderness journey of the children of Israel to the Promised Land. But most evangelical churches and organizations have only recently begun to underscore the biblical connection to immigration. (2)

During the civil rights movement, Christians were a force for positive political and social change. But in recent years, instead of following Christ’s example and caring for the sick, the oppressed, and the poor, some misguided Christian groups have focused more on opposing abortion, birth control, or gay rights. This creates the perception that Christians want to control people, not help them, and it turns people away from the church.

It’s time for us Christians to stop fighting culture wars and start loving our neighbors.

                                                                                                                                                       

1) http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2012/1024/The-rise-of-Evangelical-environmentalists-could-reshape-US-elections

2) http://news.yahoo.com/why-evangelicals-partners-immigration-reform-164718061--politics.html

Today’s GOP Makes Nixon Look Good

Today’s Congressional Republicans are successful politicians but terrible leaders. Through gerrymandered districts and well-funded campaigns, they maintain power despite holding radical views that appeal to only a minority of Americans.

The Republican party has moved so far to the right that the great Republicans of the past—Teddy Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower, George Bush, Sr., and even Ronald Reagan—would be considered too moderate to satisfy the Tea Party faction who want to dismantle the government.

It wasn’t always like this. Republicans used to be for economic growth and a social safety net that helped people who truly needed it but did not encourage sloth or perpetuate dependence. Republicans used to be for government investment in science and infrastructure, for civil rights, and for protecting the environment.

Who was the last progressive Republican president? Richard Nixon. He created the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Cancer Institute, expanded Social Security and Medicare, and proposed universal health care. He was neither a liberal nor a conservative, but a pragmatist (1). He ran a crooked campaign, but as president he really tried to do what was best for the country.

The current GOP has all of Nixon’s sleazy politics, but none of his pragmatic statesmanship.

1) http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/01/what-would-nixon-say-to-todays-republican-party/267022/

Photo: http://www.zazzle.com

Will Wind Energy Be Killed by Dirty Money?

In the budget negotiations, conservative Republicans are fighting against letting the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy expire. These politicians claim this is a principled stand. They claim letting a tax cut expire on schedule would break their pledge never to raise taxes.

Why then are many Republicans in Congress willing to let the Wind Energy Production Tax Credit expire? This tax credit gives support to a growing industry and creates American jobs. Isn’t this how Reagan’s supply-side economics is supposed to work? Why is there no passionate fight by Reagan’s ideological heirs to save this tax cut?

The answer is money—dirty money. The coal industry donates more than $13 million to political candidates and PACs each year, and more than 70% goes to Republicans (1).

Wind energy is clean. Coal is dirty. Politicians who sell out their principles for money are filthy.

1. http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=E1210

ACT NOW! Click here for a convenient form to urge your senators and congressional representative to renew the Production Tax Credit for wind energy.

Stop the GOP Obstructionism!

From 2009 to 2012, Republicans opposed every attempt by President Obama to stimulate the economy or create jobs—some analysts say the GOP may have deliberately sabotaged the economy in hopes of grabbing power (1). Senator Mitch McConnell clearly stated the GOP’s priorities: “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.”

The Republican strategy of obstruction worked in the 2010 elections because the Republicans were able to mobilize their conservative base, while liberals, frustrated by Obama’s moderate stances on some issues and his compromises on others, stayed home. But in 2012 Republicans made the election a referendum on Obama’s policies, and moderate voters spoke loud and clear: We’re sick of GOP obstructionism. Obama was re-elected, and Republicans lost seats in both houses of Congress.

But did Republicans get the message? More importantly, do they care? The GOP could decide to let the economy crash if they think it will give them an advantage in the 2014 and 2016 elections.

The current batch of Republicans have shown that they care more about winning elections than the public good. If your representative or senators are Republicans, please take the time to call or e-mail them and tell them it’s time to stop the obstructionism and start compromising. Click here for their contact information.

Source:

(1) http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/09/did-republicans-deliberately-crash-us-economy

America Needs Wind Energy

America needs an energy policy that encourages domestic oil and gas production for the present and supports clean energy technology for our future.

The Renewable Electricity Production Tax Credit currently gives tax breaks to producers of clean energy, such as wind farms. Developing our wind potential will create hundreds of thousands of jobs for American workers (1,2).

But unless the Production Tax Credit for the wind industry will expire at the end of this year unless Congress takes action. I hope you will write or call your congressional representative today and urge him or her to extend the wind tax credit.

ACT NOW! Click here for a convenient form to urge your senators and congressional representative to renew the Production Tax Credit for wind energy.

If your congressional representatives are Republicans, urge them to join ConservAmerica, an organization that works toward conservative solutions to environmental challenges (3).  

Wind energy provides jobs and energy for the present and a cleaner planet for the future. Let’s urge Democrats and Republicans to work together on this issue.

1. http://usgreentechnology.com/energy-jobs/how-many-wind-jobs-are-in-the-u-s-how-many-are-possible/

2. http://www.bluegreenalliance.org/saveamericanjobs

3. http://conservamerica.org/

We Don’t Have Mitt Romney to Kick Around Anymore

In the spirit of bipartisanship, I’ve removed the pre-election posts from this blog that pointed out Mitt Romney’s character flaws and lack of qualifications. It is the Republican Party’s policies, not Mitt Romney, that are to blame for the 2012 election results.

David Frum, former speechwriter for George W. Bush, summed up the party’s dysfunction on The Morning Joe:

“… the real locus of the problem is the Republican activist base and the Republican donor base …The people who put the cement shoes on him (Mitt Romney) are now blaming him for sinking.”

GOP Should Listen to Lincoln

The Republican Party likes to remind us that it is the party of Lincoln. Unfortunately, they have strayed from Lincoln’s ideas in many ways. This is why moderates like Colin Powel and me find ourselves disagreeing with the current GOP leadership on many issues.

I hope that the 2012 election results—in which Republicans lost the White House and seats in both houses of Congress—will give Republicans (the party  leaders and the rank and file) incentive to move back to the center and back to Lincoln’s ideas.

Democracy

In recent years, Republicans in several states passed laws (11 of which were ruled unconstitutional by courts) aimed at suppressing voting rights of minorities. Lincoln had faith in the democratic process, and he trusted the wisdom of American voters:

“The people will save their government, if the government itself will allow them.”

Government of the people (not the corporations)

Mitt Romney alienated many voters when he said, “Corporations are people, my friend.” As long as Republican policies favor large corporations over individuals, policies which during the George W. Bush administration led to a widening gap between rich and poor, the GOP will continue to lose popular support.

Lincoln said, “Republicans are for both the man and the dollar, but in case of conflict the man before the dollar.”

Labor

Our economy needs both entrepreneurs and workers. Democrats have long been the party of the labor movement, while Republicans are the party of capitalists. Our economy needs both entrepreneurs and workers, but which is more important? Lincoln said:

“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”

Social programs

Republicans are right to oppose welfare programs that discourage work and self-reliance. And here they are in keeping with Lincoln, who said, “You cannot build character and courage by taking away people's initiative and independence.” But Republicans often go too far and oppose programs that provide a social safety net. This every-man-for-himself mentality is un-American and unworthy of the party of Lincoln, who said:

 “The legitimate object of government is to do for a community of people whatever they need to have done, but cannot do at all, or cannot so well do, for themselves – in their separate, and individual capacities.”

War

Lincoln was a wartime president, but he did not start the war, and he craved a lasting peace. In Iraq, the US fought a war it didn’t have to fight—failing to learn the painful lesson of Vietnam and failing to heed Lincoln’s warning:

“Such will be a great lesson of peace: teaching men that what they cannot take by and election, neither can they take by war; teaching all the folly of being the beginners of a war.”

Malice toward none

Finally, Republicans and Democrats need to work together and seek common ground to solve our nation’s problems, because, as Lincoln said (quoting scripture):

“A house divided against itself cannot stand."

Osama bin Laden is Dead and General Motors is Alive

“Osama bin Laden is dead, and General Motors is alive!” is a catchy campaign slogan coined by Vice President Joe Biden. It also summarizes the differences between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney.

Although most of the money for the auto bailout came through the TARP bill signed by President Bush, Chrysler and GM still were headed for bankruptcy in 2009. Obama’s team refinanced and restructured the auto companies to avert bankruptcies and save American jobs (1). Mitt Romney wrote an editorial that the government should let the auto companies go bankrupt (2).

This incident, more than any other, illustrates the difference between the two candidates, writes Jonathan Cohn in The New Republic:

Credible estimates suggested that more than a million people would lose their jobs—at the very moment when, because of the very same financial crisis, hundreds of thousands of Americans were already losing jobs every month.

What would Romney have done? It’s impossible to know for sure—in part, because he’s made inconsistent and, at times, contradictory statements. … Like other critics of the rescue, Romney opposed government loans because he doubted that officials could run the auto industry in a way that was good for the carmakers, its workers, and the country as a whole. But that is precisely what has happened. Today, Chrysler and GM are making money. They are also making good cars. …

Looking back, the key disagreement between Obama and Romney wasn’t over whether the auto industry should survive. It was over whether the government should act to make the industry's survival possible—whether, facing an instance of market breakdown, the government should intervene in order to protect hundreds of thousands, and maybe more than a million, people from losing their jobs.  …

Put it all together, and it’s possible to draw from the auto industry rescue a pretty good lesson about the real differences between Obama and Romney. Obama understands that the market doesn’t always work on its own—that sometimes government must intervene in order to protect Americans from economic harm. Romney doesn’t. Obama is also willing to act in the face of political peril. Romney isn’t. (3)

Republicans like Mitt Romney say that the government should not interfere with market forces. In 2011, as the housing markets struggled to recover, Romney said, “Don't try to stop the foreclosure process. Let it run its course and hit the bottom.” He said to the market would turn around when investors buy foreclosed homes and re-sell them (4).

While it may be true that the market will correct itself, Romney doesn’t consider the human misery of losing one’s home. Families who buy homes they can’t afford often do so because they want to live in safe neighborhoods where their children can go to good schools.

Romney doesn’t care that these families’ dreams would be shattered—as long as some investor makes money on the deal. This makes sense from the guy who says, “Corporations are people,” but that it’s not his job to worry about the poorest Americans (5).

But what about Osama bin Laden? Surely any president would have sent Navy SEALs into Pakistan after the world’s most wanted terrorist, right? Not exactly:

"And if we have Osama bin Laden in our sights and the Pakistani government is unable or unwilling to take them out, then I think that we have to act and we will take them out. We will kill bin Laden; we will crush Al Qaeda. That has to be our biggest national security priority."

-Barack Obama, 2008

"I do not concur in the words of Barack Obama in a plan to enter an ally of ours... I don't think those kinds of comments help in this effort to draw more friends to our effort."

- Mitt Romney, quoted by Reuters in 2008, on the United States entering Pakistan to kill Osama bin Laden.

Time and again President Obama has risked his political career in defense of American lives and American jobs. Mitt Romney has never shown the leadership or the will to do either.

(1) http://money.cnn.com/2009/10/21/autos/auto_bailout_rattner.fortune/

(2) http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney.html

(3) http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/109159/obama-romney-gm-chrysler-detroit-rorschach-test

(4) Video (Romney on housing): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiFslD8QYg4

(5) Video (Romney’s comments on the poor): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnB0NZzl5HA    

Photo: http://mlkshk.com/p/60Y1

Obamacare Saves Lives

Opponents of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare) ignore the fact that thousands of uninsured Americans die unnecessarily from treatable conditions. A 2009 study conducted at Harvard Medical School and published in the American Journal of Public Health found that 45,000 deaths are associated with lack of health insurance in the U.S. each year (1).

The Affordable Care Act has already increased the number of insured Americans and will do more in 2014 when all its provisions are in effect (2).

The Affordable Care Act also will help states to expand Medicaid in 2014, providing health care coverage to people who cannot afford insurance. To study the impact of this expansion, researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health looked at states that have already expanded Medicaid (3). The researchers found that Medicaid expansions prevented 19.6 deaths per 100,000 adults, concluding: “State Medicaid expansions to cover low-income adults were significantly associated with reduced mortality as well as improved coverage, access to care, and self-reported health.”

Politicians like Mitt Romney who threaten to overturn the Affordable Care Act put politics ahead of American lives.

(1) http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2008.157685?prevSearch=%5BContrib%3A+Wilper%5D+and+%5BFulltext%3A+uninsured%5D&searchHistoryKey&&

(2) http://www.healthcare.gov/law/timeline/full.html

(3) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22830435

Photo: http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2012/09/obamacare-results-in-largest-drop-in.html

Continue Obama Success vs. Return to GOP Failure: The Choice Is Yours

Mitt Romney’ entire campaign is focused on criticizing President Obama’s handling of the economy. But the latest economic indicators—including employment and home sales— show that the U.S. economy continues to improve (1).

You may recall that when Obama took office, eight years of failed Republican economic policy had our economy on the brink of disaster. As this 2009 Bloomberg article states: “The economy in the U.S. probably grew in the third quarter at the fastest pace in two years as government stimulus helped bring an end to the worst recession since the 1930s, economists said” (2).

President Obama’s foreign policy has also been successful. In fact, Mitt Romney agreed with him more often than he disagreed during the foreign policy debate. Obama has put together exit strategies to end the wars George W. Bush started, and he hunted down Osama bin Laden, which Bush failed to do. But 17 of Romney’s 24 foreign policy advisors are from George W. Bush’s administration. These are the architects of failure (3).

In a democracy, people get the government they deserve. If voters are fooled into turning away from successful policies in favor of policies that are proven to fail, we’ll get exactly what we deserve.

(1) http://www.moneynews.com/Economy/US-Economy-Improving-surprise/2012/10/12/id/459782

(2) http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aDGvmWmB18w0

(3) http://www.policymic.com/articles/11219/mitt-romney-foreign-policy-team-17-of-24-advisors-are-bush-neocons

Photo: http://www.adbusters.org/blogs/adbusters/hot-romney-vs-cool-obama.html

A Plea to My Fellow Christians

Conservative Christians should back off of social issues like gay marriage and abortion. I say this not because I fundamentally disagree with my fellow Christians on both these issues, but because the perception of Christians as hard-liners drives people away from the church.

I’m not asking anyone to support gay marriage if their beliefs say otherwise. Some Christian denominations allow it and others do not, just as churches have different beliefs about remarriage for divorced people. But if Christians  cease our opposition to legal, secular gay marriage, we can make friends instead of enemies. And when some of these friends are at a point in their lives when they need God’s word, we can be there to help. But if we are perceived as hateful or oppressive, no one will listen when we tell them about God’s love.  

Likewise, we should work to reduce the number of abortions by means other than legislation. Although I agree that abortion is wrong, half the people in this country do not. People will not obey laws prohibiting an activity they do not think is morally wrong—if laws stopped such behavior, we would not have illegal drug use and illegal immigration. Rather, we should support efforts to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies, and we should support policies that ensure expectant mothers will not have to worry about health care for themselves or their babies. Making it affordable for mothers to keep their babies—or for couples to adopt—could more effectively reduce the number of abortions than would overturning Roe v. Wade.

If we truly love our neighbors, we need to show it. 1 John 4:8 says, “Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.” Jesus befriended the poor and the outcasts of his society. We should do likewise, and single mothers and gays often feel like outcasts in our society. Jesus told us to “go and make disciples of all” (Matthew 29:19). We cannot make disciples if we are making enemies.

'Atlas Shrugged' Resembles Reality Like Hogwarts Resembles Your Local High School

It’s hard to understand why the atheist views of Ayn Rand have such a strong influence on the Republican base, of whom at least 90% express a belief in God and 50% describe themselves as evangelical Christians (1,2).  

The one relevant point Rand made is that innovators deserve to profit from their inventions and should not be taxed excessively. Aside from this rather obvious nugget, Rand’s novels are drivel that are incompatible with traditional Judeo-Christian values such as charity and American values such as volunteerism.

Politicians like Paul Ryan, who based his agenda on Rand’s views, fail to see that the world has changed since Atlas Shrugged was written (in 1957, the top tax rate for regular income was 91%; in 2012 it is 37.9% [3]) or that Rand’s dystopian world resembles reality about as much as your local high school resembles Hogwarts.

First, the hero-capitalists of Atlas Shrugged all produce useful products or services: Dagny Taggart operates a railroad, Hank Rearden manufactures steel and invents a super-strong alloy, and John Galt invents a more efficient automobile engine. They exemplify Rand’s notion of the “virtue of selfishness.” In the modern world, we see a few innovators like Steve Jobs or Bill Gates, but we also see investment bankers getting rich by manipulating interest rates and laundering money. Is this selfishness also virtuous?

Second, Rand’s heroes employ American labor. If Hank Rearden laid off the workers at his steel mill and moved production to a third-world country where people work 14-hour days in unsafe conditions at near-slave wages, is he still a hero?

Third, no one gets sick in Atlas Shrugged. What would happen in real life if John Galt had been diagnosed with heart disease or cancer after he walked away from his job at the auto company? He would have no health insurance, and he would go bankrupt and leave the rest of us would pay the bill, one way or another. Is he then still the ultimate capitalist?

Fourth, Rand does not address the real-life problem of pollution. She rails against all forms of government regulation, but what if Dagny Taggart decided that she could save money by not installing any pollution controls on her locomotives? In real life, without regulation, companies are able to pass the costs of pollution (damage to our health, damage to crops, etc.) on to the rest of us. Is this selfishness virtuous?

Selfishness is never virtuous. The next time a conservative “Christian” suggests otherwise, ask him or her to look up Matthew 6:24, Luke 18:24, or 1 Timothy 6:10.

1. http://www.christianpost.com/news/research-shows-growing-republican-democratic-god-gap-76973/

2. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57398385-503544/white-evangelicals-are-half-of-gop-primary-voters/

3. http://top-federal-tax-rates.findthedata.org/

Bible Quiz for Conservative Christians

1. Jesus said, “Sell all that you have and give to the ____.”

A. “poor.” (Luke 18:22)

B. “rich, because some of it might eventually trickle down to the poor.” (Conservative politicians)

2. Jesus said, “Blessed are the ______makers.”

A. “peace” (Matthew 5:9)

B. “war” (GW Bush)

3. When asked whether people should pay taxes to Rome, Jesus pointed to Caesars’ image on a coin and said:

A. “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's …” (Mark 12:17)

B. “Render unto your offshore tax shelter the things that are yours.” (Mitt Romney)

4. Regarding homosexuality, Jesus said:

A. Nothing. (All the gospels)

B. Nothing, but since none of my close friends are gay, I’ll go ahead and assume they’ll all go to hell. (Misguided Christians whose prejudice overshadows their compassion)

5. Jesus healed the ______.

A. Sick. (Matthew 10:8)

B. I don't care; people are responsible for their own health care. (Misguided Christians whose political views overshadow their compassion)

Answer Key: If you answered B to any of these questions, please stop listening to James Dobson and other false prophets.

Republicans Play Politics with American Lives ... Again

Despite the Supreme Court’s decision that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is constitutional, Texas Governor Rick Perry recently announced that he has “no intention” of expanding Medicaid or setting up the health insurances exchanges required by the PPACA.

Perry and other Republicans continue to block health care reform in Texas despite a federal government report ranking our state dead last in overall health (1). Republicans nationwide continue to fight health care reform despite a recent study finding that more than 26,000 adults die prematurely in the United States each year because they lack health insurance (2). A 2009 study conducted at Harvard Medical School and published in the American Journal of Public Health found that 45,000 annual deaths are associated with lack of health insurance in the U.S. (3).

Republicans are putting politics ahead of American lives. This has to end. Please write your Republican governors, congressmen, and senators and demand that they stop playing politics with human lives. And please do not reward their despicable behavior with your vote this November.

Sources:

(1) http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/health/entries/2012/07/05/texas_gets_weak_rating_on_heal.html

(2) http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Daily-Reports/2012/June/21/mortality-and-the-uninsured.aspx

(3) http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2008.157685?prevSearch=%5BContrib%3A+Wilper%5D+and+%5BFulltext%3A+uninsured%5D&searchHistoryKey

Did the GOP Sabotage Our Economy?

We already know the Republican theme for the 2012 election: Blame Obama for the slowness of the economic recovery.

But Republicans have opposed all of Obama’s attempts at reform. In 2011, they blocked a stimulus bill that would have created jobs without increasing the deficit. According to The New York Times:

“While Republicans have derided the 2009 stimulus as a failure, the consensus among economists has been that it helped stave off deeper job losses and supported a modest recovery. …

[In 2011] Mr. Obama went before Congress in September to push for a $447 billion package of tax cuts and new government spending.

The centerpiece of the bill, known as the American Jobs Act, is an extension and expansion of the cut in payroll taxes, worth $240 billion, under which the tax paid by employees would be cut in half through 2012. Smaller businesses would also get a cut in their payroll taxes, as well as a tax holiday for hiring new employees. The plan also provides $140 billion for modernizing schools and repairing roads and bridges … but Republicans blocked the package from coming to a vote.

Democrats responded by breaking it into pieces, hoping to pass those considered likeliest to gain bipartisan support, including some ideas that had originated with Republicans. But the first test of that approach, a bill to provide $35 billion to state and local governments to prevent layoffs of teachers, police officers and firefighters, was also blocked by a Republican filibuster.”(1)

Michael Cohen in The Guardian points out that the Republicans now oppose economic policies once supported by conservatives:

“Republicans have opposed a lion's share of stimulus measures that once they supported, such as a payroll tax break, which they grudgingly embraced earlier this year. Even unemployment insurance, a relatively uncontroversial tool for helping those in an economic downturn, has been consistently held up by Republicans or used as a bargaining chip for more tax cuts. Ten years ago, prominent conservatives were loudly making the case for fiscal stimulus to get the economy going; today, they treat such ideas like they're the plague.

Traditionally, during economic recessions, Republicans have been supportive of loose monetary policy. Not this time. Rather, Republicans have upbraided Ben Bernanke, head of the Federal Reserve, for even considering policies that focus on growing the economy and creating jobs.

And then, there is the fact that since the original stimulus bill passed in February of 2009, Republicans have made practically no effort to draft comprehensive job creation legislation. Instead, they continue to pursue austerity policies, which reams of historical data suggest harms economic recovery and does little to create jobs. In fact, since taking control of the House of Representatives in 2011, Republicans have proposed hardly a single major jobs bill that didn't revolve, in some way, around their one-stop solution for all the nation's economic problems: more tax cuts.” (2)

Are the Republicans making a principled stand because they have a solution to our economic problems? No, they offer nothing but the same policies that were in place when the recession began. The Republicans care about one thing and one thing only:

“The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.” - Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell.

The Republicans have shown through their actions and their words that they care more about winning elections than in putting Americans back to work. Only a fool would reward such bad behavior by Republicans with a vote this November.

Sources:

(1) http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/u/united_states_economy/economic_stimulus/index.html

(2) http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/09/did-republicans-deliberately-crash-us-economy

Republicans Hate Obama More Than They Love America

Republican Sen. Mitch McConnelll said this in an interview with the National Journal's Major Garrett on Oct. 29, 2010: "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."

The Republicans' top goal is winning elections. NOT improving the economy, NOT balancing the budget, NOT making sure all Americans have affordable health coverage, NOT immigration reform, NOT keeping the country safe from terrorists.

Republican politicians hate Obama more than they love America.

He’s Not a Socialist, He’s Not a Muslim, and He Can’t Be Both

People who criticize others often expose their own ignorance. For instance, anyone who calls President Obama a Marxist or a socialist is ignorant of the definition of these words.

Don’t take my word for it; read what Ron Paul said about Obama: "In the technical sense, in the economic definition, he is not a socialist. He’s a corporatist."

Likewise, people who claim Obama is a Muslim ignore the fact that he was raised as an agnostic and  baptized as a Christian in the 1990s at Trinity United Church of Christ. Strangely, many of these same critics are quick to criticize Obama over controversial remarks made by the church’s pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

Finally, Obama opponents who claim he’s both a Muslim and a Marxist seem ignorant of the fact that the two ideologies are incompatible.

Consider this from Defending Islam, whose articles are reviewed and spproved by Islamic scholars: "Islam does not instinctively respond to Communism (Marxism) nor accept its ideology. Communism does not have a place in the lives of Muslims." 

As citizens, we have a right—and an obligation—to review President Obama’s record. Most thinking people will agree with some of his policies and disagree with others, and a thoughtful review of his policies and his opponent’s should determine our votes. But our votes should be based on facts, not on lies and ignorance.

Sources

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/04/10/ron-paul-barack-obama-is-not-a-socialist/

http://www.defending-islam.com/page322.html

Judgment Call

If Mitt Romney had won the 2007 Republican primary and gone on to be elected president, it’s likely that Osama Bin Laden would still be at large.

“If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will.” – Barack Obama, 2007

“I do not concur in the words of Barack Obama in a plan to enter an ally of ours… I don’t think those kinds of comments help in this effort to draw more friends to our effort.” – Mitt Romney, 2007

Romney and Obama are both moderates. Obama is pulled left of center by liberal Democrats, and Romney is pulled right of center by conservative Republicans. The main difference is that President Obama has shown good judgment in foreign policy matters, and he has earned a second term.