In 2007, those in the top 1% controlled 35% of the national net worth while the bottom 80% of the nation controlled only 15% of the nation’s net worth. In terms of Financial wealth, the top 1% controlled 43% of the nation’s wealth while the bottom 80% only controlled 7%

What’s sadder is that tracking of both net worth and financial wealth in the United States from 1983 through 2007 shows a steady decline for the “bottom 80%.” This study was compelling and enlightening:

http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

I bring this up because recently I was watching a Right-Wing talking head discussing the push to have the upper class pay higher taxes to address the nation’s deficit and he was citing the fact that they already pay an extraordinary amount of the Federal Taxes, both is terms of amount and percentage. I didn’t doubt his figures, but he left something off. Those at the top already control the majority of the nation’s net and financial wealth. They enjoy the benefits of the nation and it seems only fair to me that they pay a higher share of keeping this country running. And beyond that, despite the ever shrinking control of the “bottom 80%” control of the net and financial wealth of the nation, they actually pay a higher percentage of overall taxes than do the upper 20%.

Many on the Right complain that the bottom 50% do not pay Federal Income tax. I would be remiss not to point out, as everyone should understand, that although the bottom 50% do not pay Federal Income, they still pay FICA, that funds Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. In fact all of their income is subject to that tax unlike the upper classes, who after they earn $106,800.00, do not pay a single cent more in FICA. And of course the bottom 50% have a higher percentage of their total income/worth that is subject to Sales, State, City, County, Property taxes than those at the top. So if we’re going to talk about tax fairness, let’s look at it from a fair perspective.

Here are interesting figures I pulled from the Internet:

http://ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html

These are simply charts, so you can apply this as you see fit. I see fit to try to apply it to how much the upper percentile of people pay in Federal Income Taxes compared to what they control and compare that to the lower. Going to the chart for Tax year 2007:

Tax Year 2007

Today the GOP House, for the 33rd time, with the help of five gutless Democratic Party Quislings voted to repeal completely the Affordable Care Act. It was the same rhetoric in their speeches, all provable lies that anyone can look up and verify for their political narrative. Afterwards, Senate Minority leaf eater Mitch McConnell has vowed to make it the first agenda in January if the GOP takes the Senate this November. An obvious lie on his part, the first order of business will be him removing the filibuster that they’ve used so effectively to harm the nation’s recovery and make the President look bad. Fair play is not an option in this GOP’s playbook.

Polling today about the ACA in unmistakable, since the Supreme Court Ruling, more and more Americans accept and approve of the Act and oppose any efforts to repeal it. The only group that still has majority support for its repeal is surprisingly enough, the GOP that has marginalized and removed all the rational and intelligent people from their party. The mathematical fact is that even a majority of a minority party (GOP only accounts for 30% of voters) is a minority. The majority of the nation today supports the Affordable Care Act.

By repealing the Act, the GOP will immediately:

Remove the healthcare of 30 million Americans.

Will again allow insurance companies to divert more than 20% of premium income to pay for bonuses for corporate executives and lobbying instead of providing healthcare.

Will allow insurance companies to set life-time limits on care.

Will allow insurance companies to remove people from coverage if they become ill.

Will allow insurance companies to deny coverage for pre-existing conditions.

Will return the donut hole to seniors, increasing their pharmaceutical costs.

Will remove preventative healthcare to keep expensive problems from occurring for patients,

Will allow for-profit insurance company officials to get between you and your doctors to ensure company profits.

Will add to the National Debt due to uncontrolled, ever-increasing cost of healthcare to ensure insurance companies profit and paying for the uninsured for emergency room treatment.

There are many reasons to ensure the GOP doesn’t take the White House and Senate in November, but this is one of the biggest reasons. They have no alternative to the ACA other than to go back to the ever-increasing cost of healthcare, adding to the national deficit so that for profit insurance companies can get even larger profits than before. And how can they do that, by allowing Americans to die. It’s an economic fact, healthcare is only profitable if you get money from the patient without providing care needed for them to stay healthy and alive.

Insurance, like in the rest of the civilized world and as our own VA system should be single-payer and/or socialized. Our own VA care has been rated as more desirable than private for-profit care. Socialize medicine works. If you’re hung up on the word “Socialize” then you can get mental health therapy to address than counterproductive malady.

The answer for this nation is clear, Repeal and Replace the GOP in November

Growing up in the 1960s and entering the workforce in the 1970s I recall the common phrase from television and from the various stores and restaurants I worked at, “the customer’s always right.” As an employee, I dealt with some pretty snotty customers, many of us really had issues with these people, but our managers and store owners would educate us that these are the people who come to the store for services rendered, if we couldn’t provide what they needed, they can always go somewhere else, business would dry up and we would be out of a job. Although it was a lecture from the bosses, as I moved up the chain over the years, I came to realize that the bosses felt the same way and wondered if there could be a time when customers would have no choice but to shop with them and even better, have no protection from faulty service so those working at or owning the store/company/corporation providing the goods and services in question could be just as careless or predatory as they wish because the consumer would have no choice, no protections.

Well, over the years with the help of the National Chamber of Commerce and Corporate control of the Republican Party and by that proxy, the United States Government, it would appear that this is exactly where this country is moving. It’s no longer a situation where a company provides a needed service for the consumer, it’s now that the consumer has not choice but to accept the services those in charge provide.

It would seem to me that if the consumers truly had a voice in governance, elected representatives would have no problem proposing, enacting and enforcing consumer protections and regulations on corporations to protect the consumer. Instead, those in government are more concerned about elimination of all regulations as “job killers.”

In an ideal world, providing a faulty service would be the “job killer” since the consumer can go elsewhere to get that service. As a result, the company fails, jobs would be lost as the corporate owners go bankrupt for lack of business. Instead of existing to service a decent product for the consumer, the consumer now exists to fill the coffers of the corporate owners. With a blank check from Congress to do whatever they want without any consequence, any regulation, why should they provide a good service at a good price to the consumer?

The GOP fought tooth and nail against the creation of the Consumer Protection Bureau designed to help consumers because it would hurt the banks. You know, the banks whose mismanagement drove us into the worse economy since the Great Depression and then received a tax payer bail-out, while still handing out huge bonuses to the very people who mismanaged the banks and caused the current depression (I agree with Paul Krugman, this is a depression). Why can’t corporate success come from providing a good service or product for the consumer. Let good consumer relations be the incentive for business success. Oh, I forgot, it’s easier to screw the consumer when the government gives you free license to do so and if that fails, government will bail you out so you can exist if not from consumers directly, from tax payers.

The rallying cry of the conservative movement has always been “The Free Market.” Well, they’ve made sure that there isn’t a free market anymore, at least not the free market we were raised on. When you allow monopolies to exist, big companies to smother Ma and Pa Shops out of existence. When they are the only game in town, where’s the consumer choice?

It was Republican Teddy Roosevelt who pushed the break up of oil monopolies to give consumers free choice and lo and behold, services improved because these smaller companies had to compete with each other for the consumer dollars. The last time a trust was broken up was begun under Gerald Ford and finished by Jimmy Carter when AT and T was broken up. And as a result, smaller telephone companies competed with each other and resulted in technological advancements that have given us consumer choices we have today. Only problem is that now these companies are now merging back together at the behest of the Chamber of Commerce, GOP and Congress allowing it to happen. If they are the only game in town, where can the consumer go and why would a mega telecommunication company be concerned about quality and cost of services to the consumer?

By not breaking up huge trusts in corporations and banks you end up with “Too Big To Fail” that led to the crash in 2008. Thanks to the National Chamber of Commerce, the GOP and the Republican House, corporations don’t need to take care to provide the best service to appease the consumer.

This is the world that Mitt Romney wants to nail down for America. The result of which is obvious, all the nation’s wealth with the smallest percentage of the corporate elite. They will do just fine because the consumer serves the corporation, not the other way around anymore, in the Koch Brother/Mitt Romney world.

We all have heard the quote from Warren Buffett, “there is class warfare and my side is winning.” With the President’s recent speeches regarding the Bush Tax Cuts, word is coming out from the Right, yet again, that this is “Class Warfare.” And sadly, many on the left still get defensive with this accusation. Here’s my humble take on the matter.

“Psychological Projection: or projection bias is a psychological defense mechanism where a person subconsciously denies his or her own attributes, thoughts, and emotions, which are then ascribed to the outside world, usually to other people. Thus, projection involves imagining or projecting the belief that others originate those feelings.”

I cite this because even though I believe the whole right-wing talking point of blurting out “Class Warfare” from the left is a crafted response from Frank Luntz to place the left on the defensive. I also believe it is easily taken up by the lemmings on the right. As with Warren Buffett, I believe there is class warfare going on, but it has clearly been waged by the Right, the 1% and Corporations against the Middle-Class in an attempt to take what they have to fill their coffers and gain ultimate power in the political system. It’s greed on steroids and is harming the nation, and it is war. We on the left need to call it for what it is.

The battle scars of this war only exist with the middle and working class. Highest wealth disparity in this nation since the days of the Robber Barons, most of the nation’s wealth with the 1%. Social Safety net being shredded to pay for more tax cuts for the wealthy, poverty increasing, middle-class evaporating, while the richer continue to get richer from the money being redistributed from the middle and working class people upwards. There is no denying it. It started with Trickle Down and the Bush Tax Cuts was the major assault from which $4 trillion of the national debt is now attributed to. They started the war, but in order to feel better about themselves, or to make use of the propaganda machine, they blame the war on the victims. Time for the victims to fight back.

Like any conventional war, propaganda is free-flowing. Misinformation carefully crafted to convince those who hear it that the cause of the winners is justified. They now blame first responders, police, fire-fighters, emts and their pensions as the cause for the misery in the world. They blame teachers who have been paying out of their own pockets to teach the children in their charge for the misery in the world, they blame the elderly who have simply grown old and require assistance for the misery in the world, they blame unions who work not only to get living wages and good benefits for their rank and file, but for all workers, for the misery in the world. One thing people tend to overlook, the people telling you these stories aren’t suffering, aren’t miserable. They are living better in the recession than they did before the recession, but the well crafted propaganda message hits a core with those who do hurt, want to blame somebody and will listen to the loudest voices telling them who’s to blame and they will believe it. You can take this as hyperbole, but this is akin to the Nazi propaganda in Germany blaming all of their depression problems on the Jews, Gypsies, Communists, Homosexuals and using that hatred to solidify control of Germany.

Mitt Romney who personifies the stereotype of the out of touch, elitist rich snob is trying to convince people that everything he has done that has caused harm to the nation is actually the acts of President Obama. He has gone so far as to recently call the President the “Outsourcer In Chief.” This from the man who made more of his millions outsourcing jobs for Bain, as Governor outsourced government jobs to Indian call centers. To be using that much projection and propaganda, you must be at war with the people, at the very least at war with reality.

This is war, if the Right-Wing prevails, the Middle-Class will soon become the Mittle-Class, a group just above the working class, but even farther behind the upper class and only there to be used, abused and ignored while those in the upper class continue to enjoy their spoils of war.

Don’t be afraid to call it what it is and get the word out that the 1%, using the Right Wing and their Tea Party Brown Shirts started this war. The only way to combat it is to counter their propaganda with truth, be as loud if not louder to shut these liars down. Get registered, vote those solidly tied to the corporate holders of the nation’s wealth out of office and elect those who will legislatively repair the damage the GOP caused and bring back the level playing field and prosperity the country enjoyed after World War Two, under New Deal Legislation and a progressive tax code that resulted in more people getting out of poverty, growing the nation’s wealth, and government surpluses used to build things like the Interstate Highway System. Bring this back because 30 years since Trickle or Dribble down economics began, more people are now falling into poverty, and these are from the ranks of the middle class, not the upper class, those guys are still doing just fine, thank you.

Get active, get involved and don’t give in.

Watching the Ed Show when I got home from work, trying feverishly to try to get some of my tweets posted, as @Diggaduh and @MarvsWife would attest, it’s been getting harder and harder to get on air these days, though they both were posted and I struck out, but I digress. During his big panel, he had as his Conservative Representative Ron Christy. Ron is an interesting guy and he intrigued me by explaining essentially that the messaging from the Obama campaign regarding Mitt Romney’s offshore accounts, mingling with the ultra rich, being out of touch with average Americans isn’t of interest to the “common American.” Well I’m glad he cleared that up, I was interested and having a right-wing pundit on television telling this common guy that he’s wrong in what interests him is refreshing. It’s difficult to have to think for yourself, to care about yourself and your family, to have self interests regarding the character of a man trying to become your President. Don’t know how the left is able to do this all the time, it’s so much easier on the Right side of the aisle. There you don’t have to think, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, Ann Coulter, Ron Christy can do your thinking for you so you don’t have to. Whatever they say about you is your reality. Don’t concern yourself that they don’t know you, they never experienced what you’ve experienced, their moral compass points in a different direction than yours, they are your voice, all you need do is listen and follow. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, you know how it goes.

Snark aside, I take pride in the fact that I do think for myself and only myself. I don’t claim to speak for anyone on any side of the aisle and it would be presumptuous of me to think I know what appeals to others. That’s for you to decide. I think the one thing the Obama campaign has finally begun to figure out is that rather than telling supporters what they should be interested in, they’re starting to ask them what they are interested in and are working to accommodate that. The right-wing continues to frame the debate to a group who have no problem being told what and how they should think. I think that’s the real intellectual divide in this country. I have no statistics to back this up, it’s purely anecdotal, but generally, one side is prone more to critical thinking of the world around them and what will make things better for themselves and others while the other side is too comfortable being told what the answers are so they don’t have to think and respond accordingly.

And for the only time in my short blogging career, I’ll quote Dennis Miller, “That’s what I think, I could be wrong.”

Good night all

PS Thanks to @NicoleSandler, covering today for Randi Rhodes quoting a tweet of mine to her and reading my bio from twitter. It was unexpected and kind of her to give this little idiot a shout out.

Don’t know if any of you have heard this before, but it would appear that the Tea Party really has a problem with taxes. In fact they base their whole existence on what they believed was the reason for the Boston Tea Party and the Patriotic Demonstration against English taxation by throwing barrels of tea into Boston Harbor. Problem is that according to someone who was there and wrote about it, the issue was against a corporate tax cut for the East India Company that harmed local business as Thom Hartmann brilliantly educates us on. Here is the link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UiLZk2TE8k

But that’s okay, it doesn’t matter because it is a common misconception of most Americans what the original Tea Party was about, but there’s no harm in knowing the truth, unless your very existence depends on a lie. But no matter, the Tea Party vehemently demand that all taxes be reduced, if not eliminated because they are too high. In fact, GOP Chairman Reince Priebus has gone so far recently as to say his fear of an Obama re-election is that he would have to pay his taxes. Forget that under the current president, current Federal and FICA taxes are at their lowest rates in over 60 years. The only taxes that have gone up have been some state and local taxes to continue to fund services once subsidized by the Federal government by funds now cut off by a Tea Party Republican House in Congress.

So the Tea Party doesn’t want to pay taxes, they are opposed to them, they are too high, yet all of the Tea Party membership enjoy government services provided by Federal, State, County and Municipal taxation. Services like:

Clean water standards, monitoring of pharmaceuticals, safe food supply, clean air standards, interstate highway system, roads, sidewalks, public transportation, police, fire fighters, emts, social security, Medicare, Medicaid, United States Military, Veteran services, functioning court system, jails, prisons, public schools, community colleges, state universities, power grid, public airwaves, parks, etc, etc.

Now many in the Tea Party would say, in fact do say, that most of these services can and should be privatized. Well what would be the unintended consequences of that? Government operation of these service do not incorporate a profit margin that private industries demand for their shareholders.

A good example is Medicare which only has 3% of its budget geared towards administering of services, compared to private insurance which prior to a 20% limit imposed by the Affordable Care Act, had 35% to 40% administration costs, i.e. Bonuses to the CEOs, Board and profits to the shareholders. Another example has been a recent phenomena where Fire Stations have privatized and fires breaking out at homes that haven’t paid the dues have been left to burn.

So, government with the taxes imposed still provide many services that Tea Party folks would sorely miss if they were gone, or could find themselves unable to afford if they were privatized. By working to not pay their fair share of taxes for government to provide these services, Tea Party folks are quite simply dining and dashing.

To get back to the Thom Hartmann link at the top of this rant, one reason I included it was to point out the irony involving the Tea Party and their fight against unfair taxation memorialized by the myth of the Boston Tea Party. The irony is that the Tea Party may have begun as a grassroots movement begun under Bush, to complain about his spending, but has been with the infusion of Corporate Dollars from David and George Koch and other billionaires, melded into a political force. The rank and file Tea Party folks have little idea they are actually working for the very type of Corporation that the true Boston Tea Party folks were actually protesting about.

Exercise true personal responsibility, pay your bills for services rendered, pay your taxes.

The subject of this rant has been well covered and documented by Fortune’s Katherine Eban. She’s done an outstanding job explaining this political farce in clear, unbiased and restrained tones. Now for an angrier snarkier attack from my point of view. Brace yourself, this involves some reading, thinking, reflection and patience so the Right Wing may want to stay away as this is beyond them.

First the groundwork, please review Katherine’s story as published in Fortune magazine:

http://features.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2012/06/27/fast-and-furious-truth/

And one followup:

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/07/03/fast-and-furious-follow-up-the-atf-and-gun-stores/

and finally an interesting letter from Voth’s attorney to Rep Darrell Issa that somehow gets very little play on both Mainstream Media and even the “interwebs”:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/86130067/Voth-Lawyer-Letter

Okay, done your reading and research. Now my take on the matter:

Darrell Issa from day one has wanted to embarrass and ruin the presidency of Barack Obama. It’s no secret. From the day the GOP took control of the House he advised that the President’s administration was the most corrupt in history and as Chairman of the Oversight Committee, he was going to hold weekly investigations to prove the corruption, like Ken Starr on steroids, he would find something. The only thing he’s been able to get any kind of nibble was the Fast and Furious debacle. But it was compelling because it could be used to illicit the support of what I think is the most dangerous domestic terrorist organization in this country, The National Rifle Association. Issa himself went on air to say that the whole “gun walking” plan came from Obama and Holder themselves to create a call to outlaw and repeal second amendment rights. Forget the fact that what rogue agents of the ATF were doing was outside the knowledge of Attorney General Holder and President Obama (or that Obama has actually expanded gun rights in this nation) and that no arrests of the straw purchasers could be made because Arizona and Federal law permitted these purchases. In fact, these purchases were legal because the NRA fights tooth and nail to make sure everyone has the right to buy a gun from the gun manufacturers they represent. It’s not about gun rights, it’s about profits.

I’ve often tweeted that it’s interesting that whenever anyone calls for stricter gun laws to keep the guns out of the hands of convicted criminals and the insane the loudest voice in opposition to these laws is the NRA. Is is because they are made up of criminals and insane? Well, that is entirely possible. I work law enforcement and I’ve arrested prohibited possessors (convicted felons for whom it is illegal to possess firearms) and I’ve found it interesting that many of them are card-carrying members of the NRA. But honestly, it’s a matter of profits. The NRA over the years have become a lobbying group for the gun manufacturers. To make a profit, you have to sell more guns and who has the greatest need for guns besides hunters and Law Enforcement? Well those who want to use them for other purposes and have to use them right away.

In fact, NRA membership is a small fraction of lawful, responsible gun owners. Their call to stop all gun laws because then “only the criminals will have guns” is laughable. By not having such laws, you make it easier for criminals and the insane to have guns. So you end up with more guns in the hands of those predisposed to use them in not such a nice or defensive way.

So, as Katherine Eban points out, ATF agents observed the sale of guns to straw purchasers, but because prosecutors could not allow them to arrest these purchasers due to the lax gun laws, the guns ended up being walked over to the drug lords in Mexico. Border Agent Terry was killed in a gun battle where one of these guns were found. Honestly, he would most likely still would have been killed whether one of these guns were there or not, that is a fact. Fast and Furious had little to do with that death, but it make great politics for gun nuts in the nation to blame it on.

An lets not forget that the investigation is continuing. Issa was demanding of Holder grand jury and wiretap transcripts of this ongoing investigation. Forget that it is illegal for Holder to release these documents, but it makes for great politics on Issa’s part. Hell, he was able to get Holder one way or the other. Since he didn’t release them, he held him in contempt of Congress. Had he released them, he would have broken the law and the prosecution of those responsible would have been compromised. Dirty politics clear and simple from a man convicted of being in possession of a concealed weapon and placed on six months probation, Darrell Issa. Who writes this stuff?

The NRA is just as responsible for Agent Terry’s death as the whole Fast and Furious operation was because were it not for NRA sponsored lax gun laws and lax gun law enforcement, the guns would have never made it across the border. That being said, other guns would have most likely been used and Agent Terry would still be dead. But I’m using right-wing partisan logic in this matter. They want to blame Holder, then they have to also blame the NRA.

I’m all for responsible gun ownership. I believe honest, caring and responsible people can wait a period of time before getting a gun. I believe these guns should be licensed and monitored just like automobiles. There is no harm in that. Nobody is out to take them away from you. If you feel that way, then I suggest you are paranoid and as such, you shouldn’t be anywhere near a gun. Let’s be more reasonable in keeping guns away from unlawful and unstable people in the country, it can be done with little inconvenience to others, the only people who would suffer would be those who sell the instruments of death and destruction. So they’ll have to reduce CEO bonuses a bit, who the fuck cares if it saves lives.

Keep in mind these rants are merely my observations and attempts to apply logic to issues that I’m concerned with. I welcome any researched, peer review studies that shows my opinions to be off base at any time for due consideration. That being said:

The essential outcome of the Citizen’s United Ruling as most people on both sides of the aisle agree with is that Corporations share the same rights as sentient born human beings and that use of money equals speech in the political process. The Supreme Court has ruled it to be constitutional. Forget that the case they were ruling on had little or nothing to do with this question of corporate rights, Justice Roberts himself changed the nature of the case in order to make this ruling. So the ruling was made and it is now the law of the land. Unlike those on the right who complain that the 5-4 decision on the Affordable Care Act isn’t Constitutional and the 5 of the 9 got it wrong, we on the left accept the ruling of Citizen’s United and are working to amend the Constitution to resolve the issue. The right would appear to want to change the law and/or impeach Justice Roberts. Interesting take on how the two sides interpret things they don’t like. To continue.

Those on the right who support the ruling say that not only does this give power to the corporations, it gives power to the unions, citing that they can use their financial backing of its membership to sway elections just as much as corporations. Well, there is a problem with that analysis. It assumes that Corporations are equal to unions in terms of financial backing and the voices each institution represents from their membership (for unions the workers and for corporations the CEO and board of directors) for having a voice in the political process.

I was raised with the belief, emphasised in civics classes (which sadly most schools don’t appear to have anymore) that the basis of this nation was that the political process boiled down to one man, one vote. No matter the financial class, racial background (14th amendment and 24th amendment) sex (19th amendment) of the individual, as long as they were 18 or older (26th amendment) their votes were equal. So with Citizen’s United, even corporations enjoy the same equality as people in the public, but like Orwell points out in Animal Farm, all animals are created equal, just some animals are more equal than others.”

The facts between corporation and unions is one, their representation and how that representation affects the decision to contribute to a campaign. Corporations do not represent the workers of the companies (with a few noted exceptions) they represent the CEO and board of directors who represent the stockholders. Their sole purpose is to ensure the profitability of the corporation to pay back the investments of the stockholders. Not truly an altruistic point of view, but acceptable in a capitalist society. The wealth of these corporations are immense. It’s been estimated that thanks to the Bush tax cuts, corporations in the United States are sitting on nearly $3 trillion dollars. Now compare that to unions.

Unions represent the workers within their ranks. Leadership of the union hinges on elections of the rank and file as you would expect in a democracy. If rank and file are not happy that their leadership is providing for them what they need to live thrive and survive, they are replaced. In terms of financial assets, considering unions now only represent 11.8% of the workforce. These workers don’t always make the huge “union wages” those on the right like to cite (urban myth). Combined, a small fraction of the $3 trillion corporations have to deal with. No equality here.

And let’s get beyond the whole concept of Corporations/Unions are equal to individual voters who are not part of the union or have any say to the board of directors of corporations about how that money should be spent. I have only one vote and a small amount of money to contribute to campaigns of my choosing. How do I compare to untold millions, possibly billions that a handful of people can put up using money as “free speech” to sway public opinion in to the self interests of the corporations and not the self interests of the people who live and work, going paycheck to paycheck to provide housing, food, healthcare, education for their children, etc, etc, etc.

Citizen’s United is constitutional, The Supreme Court has ruled it that way and as shown with the Montana Case won’t even reconsider. Amending the Constitution is the only remedy to say that only sentient, flesh and blood human beings are people and that money cannot be used to give some people more rights than others. In a true democracy, all people are created equal and under no circumstances are some people more equal than others.

Hope you enjoyed this.

On twitter, I often post in my 140 character straight-jacket that I see the term Christian Conservative as an Oxymoron. To be fair, I’m sure those on the right who place that in their bios along with references to “tea party” “NRA” “Birtherism” etc truly believe that they are Christians. However, I do have questions and would like some clarification.

When saying they are Christian Conservatives, are they also implying that Jesus Christ was himself a Conservative? If so, a fiscal or social Conservative? I debated this once on a Twitter Time Line with a man who called himself a Christian Conservative and I asked him to quote, chapter and verse, exactly what Christ said or did that fell under the tenets of conservatism. He couldn’t but instead cited that Jesus wasn’t political which I found amusing. From my reading of the Bible it would seem to me that he was clearly a political figure. At least those in Judea who were in power at the time thought so, saw him as a threat to public order, both religious and secular and had him crucified, but I digress.

By acknowledging that Jesus wasn’t a political figure, he did acknowledge that by his standards, Jesus wasn’t conservative. If he thought so, I would believe he would cite something in the Bible to back that up. As @JohnFugelsang, who Stephanie Miller calls the Ecclesiastic Mook would point out, Jesus never said anything about homosexuality, was against the death penalty, offered free healthcare, commanded of his followers to sell everything and follow him, told them to feed the starving, clothe the naked, etc. All of which would appear to indicate a liberal bent on Jesus’ part. Of course, those on the right would add that Jesus demanded that of the people, not government. A fair point. But in today’s world, not exactly practical. God bless those who personally go out of their way to help those in distress within their reach, but there are literally millions just in this country where that isn’t feasible and were it not for a structured social safety net managed by the government, these people would be suffering all the more. And this net is paid for via taxes paid in by those who do have the ability to pay in. In this case, I do see taxes to aid fellow humans as a moral issue demonstrated by and demanded of Christ, using government to implement. I don’t see where Jesus would argue against this, in fact did he not say, “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s.”?

The moral issues the right-wing bring up, all come from the Old Testament, not the new. Though Jesus was a practicing Jew (something the Right appears to have problems with too) he proposed in his teaching a new sect of the Hebrew Faith that centered more on seeing to the humanity as a way to honor God. Keep in mind that Christianity began as a Jewish Sect. It wasn’t until the Council of Nicaea when the Romans adopted it as a new State religion, full of many of the pagan believes enjoyed by the people of the time, did it become a faith of its own, separate from the Hebrews.

So to wrap up, if you want to call yourself a Christian Conservative, be prepared to cite chapter, verse and context to show how Jesus lived and preached to tenets of today’s social conservative beliefs. If you can’t accept that most if not all of his teachings fall under the liberal context and as a result, to slam liberals you have to acknowledge that you slam Jesus. Jesus was far more forgiving of Gentiles than today’s Gentiles have been of people like him. A little tolerance of those who don’t follow within your stated sense of morality is very Christ like, ie Christian. Just saying.

Andy Warhol spoke of everyone getting their 15 minutes of fame, but in the case of Ted Nugent, not only is that time up, I think he owes us time back. This idiot who’s so pro gun and hunting while at the same time quite literally crapped his pants to avoid service in Vietnam tries to portray himself as a tough guy. Ted, forest animals don’t shoot back so stalking them and shooting at them at a distance is no test of courage.

Now this idiot who in his prime probably couldn’t be given the trip to Hollywood on American Idol is now saying that perhaps it would have been better if the South won the Civil War.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/07/06/ted-nugent-thinks-we-might-be-better-off-if-the-south-had-won-the-civil-war/

Better for who Ted? First of all, a loose confederation of states would not have become the world economic and military power the United States is. And of course the issue of allowing people to hold other people in slavery because of economic reasons should be sickening to anyone of moral character and intelligence. Oh excuse me, I forgot who this rant was about.

Ted, you’re a drunken idiot even when you are sober. Loud, violent and no talent. Give us our 15 minutes back or take one of your weapons and stand a post in Afghanistan.