As we near January 1, 2014 and the full implementation of the Affordable Care Act, many are grasping for any straw they can to dissuade Americans from trusting or supporting a law that has already been written, enacted, signed into law and upheld by the Robert’s Conservative Supreme Court as Constitutional. Many on the right cite now that President Obama “lied” over saying you can keep your insurance, even though the insurance you keep ends up costing you more in premiums than what you ever get back in coverage, otherwise known as “junk” policies.

The Republican Party went so far as to shutdown our government for what Ted Cruz coins as a “Train Wreck” destined to cost jobs, freedoms and money. Forget the fact his orchestrated shutdown of government cost the United States economy in those two weeks $24 billion in lost economic activity and 120,000 private sector jobs. It would appear that if ObamaCare won’t endanger the economic health of the nation or cost jobs, the GOP will create the losses themselves fighting it. Somewhat ironic but true.

What follows is a brief history of what led us to the Affordable Care Act, the facts regarding the law, some of the myths and the pros and cons about implementation of the law. I will include links to the sites I used for this rant for your own edification.

A Brief History:

The debate over our government mandating healthcare actually goes back to our founding. In 1790 the first Congress that included 20 of our “framers” mandated that ship owners buy health insurance for their seamen. It was signed into law by George Washington. In 1798 it amended the law requiring the seamen to buy insurance themselves. This was signed into law by John Adams, considered today to be the first “conservative” president of the United States.  This comes from Harvard Law Professor Einer Elhauge:

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/politics/102620/individual-mandate-history-affordable-care-act

The reason for this was simple, at the time, traveling the seas paid a high price of individual’s health. We were a young nation that depended on sea travel for our international commerce. Getting sick was costly to business, our economy. Requiring healthcare coverage was an easy fix to a problem that could seriously impact our economy of productivity. So it was required then, as it should be today.

In the late 19th Century, European nations, who were still essentially conservative, began implementing mandatory and universal healthcare for their citizens. In the late 19th Century and early 20th Century the Progressives began looking to expand healthcare for the workers for more “humanitarian” rather than nationalistic reasons.  Theodore Roosevelt advocated for healthcare believing a nation couldn’t be so strong if her people were so sick and poor. In 1906 the American Association of Labor Legislation led the fight for health insurance.  They did not want to abolish capitalism, they wanted to reform it. They proposed health insurance for those families earning less than $1,200.00 a year that provided services of physicians, nurses, and hospitals. The costs would be shared between workers, employers and the State. In 1914 the American Medical Association backed the AALL agenda.  In 1917, the AMA House of Delegates favored compulsory health insurance as proposed by the AALL, but many state medical societies opposed it. Further, the American Federation of Labor denounced the plan fearing that government control of healthcare would weaken the unions by usurping their ability to provide healthcare to their members. There was also opposition from the private insurance companies and finally, due to our entry into World War I, and the anti German “socialistic” views that provided healthcare to their citizens, sympathy for our own national healthcare withered until the 1930’s and Franklin Roosevelt.

After the implementation of Social Security work for national healthcare went forward. After FDR’s death, Harry Truman took up the cause. However, whereas FDR looked at utilizing private insurers competing with each other for business among the citizens who would be subsidized by the government, Truman looked to a single payer plan modeled under Social Security. Everyone paid in and everyone would be covered. Both plans were denounce as “socialism” modeled under what the communists had. Conservatives fought the very notion of universal healthcare for these ideological reasons despite the benefits such plans would provide. When the Republicans took the Congress in 1946 ushering in what Truman would call ‘The do nothing Congress” the efforts for giving the nation a healthcare plan died until the 1960s.

During the push to pass the Medicare and subsequent Medicaid laws, the same conservative voices citing the same arguments of “socialism” taking away “freedom” came down. A future President, Ronald Reagan in his ads opposing Medicare said “If you don’t {stop Medicare} one of these days you and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children’s children what it once was like in America when men were free.” A line that Senator Ted Cruz actually plagiarized from Ronald Reagan in his opposition to ACA.

What is interesting is that after he became president, Reagan actually worked with the Democrats to save and extend the solvency of both Social Security and Medicare. With Medicare in place and later Medicaid as well as improvements to both programs in implementation, efforts went on regarding the 55 million Americans who remained uninsured because they didn’t earn enough to buy health insurance that more and more became for-profit under Reagan resulting in higher premiums and stricter guidelines regarding who they would insure, but made too much to qualify for Medicaid, and were too young for Medicare. So in the 1990’s, Bill Clinton tried to implement coverage for these people in what became known as “HillaryCare.”

The right used the same talking points of socialism used for nearly a hundred years. This time, the conservative think tank known as the Heritage Foundation came up with a plan that required an individual mandate to buy insurance from the private market. However they weren’t too keen on government regulating the market regarding pre-existing conditions, life-time caps, or rescission of coverage. HillaryCare died in Congress, but the Heritage plan was picked up and modified and implemented in the State of Massachusetts and was later called “RomneyCare.” We then moved to the debate over the writing, creation and implementation of the Affordable Care Act known as ObamaCare. The arguments and tactics mirrored those over the previous century, false claims of socialism, too high of costs, jobs, freedom, and personal attacks on the advocates. But it passed and was held constitutional none-the-less. President Obama succeeded where a century of previous Presidents and administrations failed; he implemented a plan that filled the gap of around 55 million Americans unable to get care. Prior to this, we were the only industrialized nation that didn’t have some form of universal healthcare. Further, our healthcare costs were significantly higher than the rest of the world with worse outcomes for the majority of people. If you had money, health insurance you had care. Unfortunately we aren’t a nation of million and billionaires, so access to our great system of medicine was out of reach to far too many citizens.

Here are some interesting links I used for the above:

http://www.pnhp.org/facts/a-brief-history-universal-health-care-efforts-in-the-us

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2009/07/29/53311/medicare-flashback/

So what is ObamaCare?

Here is the link to HB3590 “The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” also known as “ObamaCare” passed by Congress, signed into law and upheld by the Supreme Court:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-111publ148/html/PLAW-111publ148.htm

If you don’t have the time to read this document, here’s a good summary of the law:

http://www.dpc.senate.gov/healthreformbill/healthbill52.pdf

I cite the links to the law for those of you who may have read or have been sent tweets and post citing certain sections of the law that sound terrible. The problem is, many trolls on the right will cite something in the act and even give the page it is on, thinking you won’t go to the effort to read that page of the law. This has been going on for a few years. There are no death panels, coverage for undocumented aliens, or implantation of micro-chips, anything they cite.

Here is a link from NCBI that tells you what the implications to public health the ACA is:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3001814/

Finally, here’s two links I have found to be the most comprehensive and thorough guide to ACA and all the key factor surrounding it to educate you when confronted by those on the right. One comes from American Public Health Association and the other is a guide dispelling the myths from both sides, citing facts, sources and answers you may have regarding ACA:

http://www.apha.org/advocacy/Health+Reform/ACAbasics/

http://obamacarefacts.com/

Key facts regarding ACA:

CBO estimated in July 2012 that 55 million Americans under the age of 65 are uninsured which is 1 in 5. Without ACA, that number would grow.

Healthcare Spending represents 17.9% of our Gross Domestic Product and is expected to be 20% by 2020.

7 in 10 deaths in the United States are related to preventable diseases such as obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure, heart disease and cancer and 75% of our health care dollars are spent treating those conditions. However, only three cents of each health care dollar currently goes to prevention. ACA places emphasis on prevention.

The United States spends far more on medical care than any other industrialized nation but ranks 24th among 30 OECD nations in terms of life expectancy.

Without ACA the CBO estimates that the uninsured rate would rise from 20.4 % in 2012 to 21.1% in 2022 with 60 million lacking coverage.

ACA is expected to reduce budget deficits by $210 billion from 2012 through 2021.

Under ACA you can no longer be denied coverage for pre-existing conditions, you no longer face life-time caps on coverage, you can no longer have you coverage rescinded by the insurance companies, companies must direct 80% of premium dollars to healthcare.

ACA is free market healthcare coverage, not single-payer. Insurance companies must compete with each other for your business. That is capitalism, not socialism.

ACA is fully funded via eliminating wasteful spending of Medicare Trust Fund moneys via fraud and giveaways to private insurance companies. It is also funded by additional tax revenues from tanning salons, medical device providers, insured and penalties from those who don’t take advantage of the individual mandate. This link shows how the funding is provided and why:

http://www.acponline.org/advocacy/where_we_stand/assets/i2-how-is-the-aca-funded.pdf

Here’s another link explaining the funding:

http://obamacarefacts.com/costof-obamacare.php

ACA has been compared to RomneyCare. That is actually a good comparison because the Heritage Foundation program modified by the Massachusetts legislative branch and implement by Mitt Romney is working as this link from Forbes explains:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/robwaters/2013/11/08/its-not-the-website-stupid-new-research-says-romneycare-worked-obamacare-will/

What are the Myths?

These two links analyzes the most discussed myths from both sides of the aisle regarding ACA:

http://www.factcheck.org/2013/09/obamacare-myths/

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/09/29/fact-check-ted-cruz-obamacare-health-care/2890995/

What are the Pros and Cons?

The major con regarding ACA in my opinion is that it isn’t single-payer as Harry Truman and many today advocate for. It is what works in Europe and will work here. The problem is that isn’t politically possible in Washington today. ACA is a step in the right direction, but it isn’t where we ultimately have to go. However, as the Stone’s say, “You can’t always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you might just find, you get what you need.”

Here is an honest link of the pros and cons regarding ACA:

http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-pros-and-cons.php

Summary:

ACA or ObamaCare is here to stay. As it nears full implementation, it is obtaining higher approval ratings from the American people, which is what the right feared. Much like their concerns over Medicare in the 1960’s, now that we have it, we won’t give it up. Healthcare is a good investment for a nation’s health, productivity and overall economy.

For both liberal and conservative reasons we should be working to make this a more healthy nation. Partisan politics get in the way of logical and pragmatic thinking. However, this has been our nation’s history.

Despite the pros and cons, the myths, the attacks, the problem with the Website, on the whole, this is much better than what we had before and it is already having benefits for people as they become involved with it. To try to end it now is quite simply impossible and those in office who say that’s what they are working for are lying to their gullible base. They say they will end it to get the uninformed people’s support, but they know it can’t be done. Again, this is the history of our politics.

I know there is a lot to read here, but consider this post a warehouse of information you can use with your friends, family, coworkers and more importantly, trolls trying to irritate you into being against a program that helps everyone, including the trolls.

Enjoy!

Article VI of the United States Constitution states: “…This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

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.”

That last sentence is perhaps the most important line for Article VI for not only the Federal Government, but for all lesser elected offices, “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

This line and the concept of separation of Church and State represented the views of our founders regarding how and if we should include religion in our government.

The United States was not only the first Constitutional Democracy created, it was the first nation created without a National Religion. This was emphasize in the Treaty of Tripoli, a treaty ratified by unanimous consent in the Senate (made up of many of our original founders) and signed by President John Adams that stated clearly “As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims],—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan  nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.”

Why is this so important?

The founders knew the history of the colonies was a story of people coming to our shores to escape religious persecution from the countries they came from. The Puritans were demonized by the English State Religion, Protestants were persecuted by Catholic State Religions, Catholics were persecuted by Protestant State Religions, so the United States was to be different.

Our founders were mostly Deists, they believed in God, but many didn’t put much faith (no pun intended) in organized religions or the rituals and nuances that surrounded those faiths. They knew of and studied all the religions of the day. The Federalist Papers and Jefferson’s letters discuss what has become known as “The Separation of Church and State.”

The founders advocated not only religious freedoms for the citizens of this country, but more importantly the freedom against religion influence on the workings of government.

Religions are prone to advocate to one degree or another, intolerance against people. All faiths have passages in their religious texts that have been used to justify bigotry, intolerance against other faiths, lack of faith, and/or sexuality. This was true then and it is true now.

So to have a nation that honors the separation of Church and State, the founders weren’t saying you couldn’t be a Christian, a Protestant, Catholic, Jew, Muslim, Agnostic, Atheist, Hindu, etc.; you are entitled to have you views and use your views to govern your life, just not the lives of those you represent. Sorry Bill O’Reilly the history is clear, the founders did believe in Secular governance.

A religion can be used to justify slavery as it did in the Southern States. Republicans in the 19th Century bridged all religious interpretations of the day, focused on Secular reasons to justify abolition and the eventual end of Slavery despite the hard felt views of many in State and local governments.

When you are in office, you aren’t leading a congregation of like minded religious types; you are governing a community of varied beliefs and tolerances.

You are there to serve them and their needs, even if they conflict with yours. The most honored politicians in our history did that very well.

Kennedy governed as a secularist, not a Catholic;

Truman governed as a secularist not a Methodist,

as did other great leaders. They allowed things to progress that possibly ran counter to their own personal religious views, as taught to them in order to serve all of the people they represented. You can’t do that if you place your religion before your duty as an elected government official.

If you are unable to separate yourself from your religion in making decision that impact all you serve, you frankly have no business running for public office.

If elected you must represent each and every Christian, Muslim, Jew, Hindu, Agnostic, Atheist, and each and every homosexual. You are not there to change their views, you’re there to represent their views as Americans, all deserving of the same rights as all other Americans regardless of color, race, religion, sex or sexual orientation. That is the only formula that works in a country we hope honors democratic rule.

So why this rant?

I believe in having tolerance for all people regardless of their classification. I have problems with those who practice intolerance against people based on any criteria of their birth or faith and I honor those who work to bridge those intolerances and bring understanding and equal rights to discriminated people. The story I’m about to relate pertains to a Phoenix City Council race in District 8 on Tuesday. However, a variation of this story I’m sure can be found in other races on Tuesday and in years to come.

District 8 has for nearly 50 years been represented by an African American. The Phoenix City Council has had good representation from that District that covers a portion of Phoenix that is predominately minority and impoverished. One of the candidates for this race, Reverend Warren Stewart is an African American who has honorably fought for minority rights in Phoenix for years. He worked to get us to honor Martin Luther King, he is a man of God, he has helped the Hispanic Community, and his resume would appear to be what many of us would like to see in a City leader. But there is a problem. He cannot separate the prejudices of his faith against the inherent rights of all the people he will represent.

He has issues with the LGBT community, and them with him. Although he says he supports civil unions and supports Phoenix City Ordinances giving rights to LGBTs, he is clearly on record as opposed to same sex marriage. He went so far as to send President Obama a letter regarding his evolution into accepting that same sex marriage is a right. Reverend Stewart is placing his religious intolerance of those outside his version of the faith against a growing number of more enlightened constituents who support gay marriage.

Bigotry is not restricted to angry old white men; it transcends all races, sexes, faiths, ideologies, and sexual orientation. In my opinion you cannot be intolerant of any group despite intolerance practiced on you or your work to end it for others. If you are intolerant of any group for any reason, you may as well accept being intolerant of all groups.

To justify your intolerance using religion and indicating you will govern under those religiously sanctioned intolerance does no service to you, your faith or the people you intend to represent.

Bigotry finds strange bed-fellows. Reverend Stewart is a Democrat, by all accounts a liberal Democrat, but his views on being anti same-sex marriage and frustration with the President’s conversion has gained him support from Conservatives in Arizona. See this link to a blog post that speaks in favor of Reverend Stewart using language that those of a liberal/progressive/enlightened and tolerant mindset would find distasteful:

http://azconservative.org/2013/01/11/radical-homosexual-activists-attack-free-speech-religious-liberty-in-arizona/

What is also disappointing with the Reverend’s campaign is he is clearly playing the race card in trying to win this seat. His opponent is Kate Gallego, her married name that those on Stewart’s side says she using a Hispanic name to gain support, not that women often take the names of their husbands. They are sending out fliers saying that voting for Gallego will end 47 years of racial diversity on the City Council.

These are links to a local story of this race and the views of the LGBT community here:

http://www.azcentral.com/community/phoenix/articles/20130923phoenix-council-election-race.html?nclick_check=1

http://www.onecommunity.co/blog/2013/02/gay-rights-group-raises-concerns-over-potential-phoenix-council-candidate

I agree that racial diversity is good, but what’s more important is tolerant governance of all races, sexes, religions and sexual orientation. To be an African American on the Phoenix City Council does provide diversity in racial make-up, but does it provide tolerance for all people?

When I voted for Barack Obama twice, I didn’t vote for him because he was black, I voted for him because he is intelligent, thoughtful, compromising and tolerant. It helped that he was black, but that wasn’t the focus of my votes or my current support. This country does need more racial diversity in all government offices, we need more female representation in all government offices, but more importantly, we need more tolerance, void of religious shackles in all government offices.

We govern better for all people when we do so secularly, not religiously. Save that for home and church and remember we are a diverse nation and that is where we draw our strengths. Intolerance saps us of those gains whether it’s for racial, sexist, or religious reasons.

I’m not in District 8 so I won’t be voting there and I’m not telling those living in District 8 how to vote, but I am asking you to consider what is more important when you make your selection, a person of race or a person of tolerance for all?

And as I mentioned above, this scenario is playing out in other races across the country with different candidates for different offices, the same rule applies. Figure out what is important to you, but no matter what, VOTE!

There have been numerous votes in the Senate and House over the years that have impacted or could have had the impact to seriously effect the health of this nation.

On October 16th, 2013 H.R. 2775 which was a Continuing Resolution to reopen the United States Government and raise the debt ceiling was before both chambers of Congress. The U.S. Government had been shut down for 16 days costing the economy by conservative estimates $24 billion dollars. This was on top of the $700 billion already lost to our economy due to the Tea Party sponsored and supported sequester and austerity cuts to federal spending at time of a recession and anemic recovery.

All economists were agreed as to what was at stake for this vote. Pass it, government would reopen, the debt ceiling would be extended until February 2014 and both chambers of Congress would finally meet in conference to hash out a long overdue long term budget.

To not pass the CR would result in certain destruction of the United States and world economies. The Stock Market would crash, interest rates for all loans would increase for all people, businesses and governments and the credit rating of the United States would be downgraded again, possibly even worse than in 2011, during the last threaten credit default.

These facts were indisputable unless you were an idiot or you wanted to cause irreparable harm to the nation, or both.

As it turned out 18 US Senators and 144 House members, all Republicans voted to keep our government shutdown and default on our debt.

They wanted to keep vital services defunded; parks and memorials closed and to make matters worse for Americans of all races, creeds and party affiliation. This showed that they hated the President and the Democratic Party more than they cared about the nation and people they claim they love and want to serve.

These Senators and members of the House also voted to keep millions of dollars out of the hands of their constituencies, creating additional troubles for the impoverished, working class, veterans and elderly. They did no good service to those who elected them to office, apparently out of either fear of being primaried or pure hatred of the current administration.

This vote must be remembered because these people who voted to destroy our country on October 16, 2013 need to be voted out when their terms expire.

Below is the list and phone contact information for each Senator and Member of Congress who voted Nay to HR 2775. All are Republican. They cannot be forgiven and on November 4, 2014, all House members who voted no must not be allowed back in the House and if the Senator who voted no is up for re-election, they too must be denied another term.

Keep this list, keep it generating for as long as it takes to get all 18 Senators and 144 House members out of government.

Alabama

Senator Jeff Sessions                  202-224-4124

Senator Richard Shelby               202-224-5744

Robert Aderholt                            202-225-4876

Mo Brooks                                    202-225-4801

Martha Roby                                202-225-2901

Mike Rogers                                 202-225-3261

Arizona

Paul Gosar                                    202-225-2315

Matt Salmon                                  202-225-2635

David Schweikert                          202-225-2190

Trent Franks                                 202-225-4576

California

Doug LaMalfa                                202-225-3076

Tom McClintock                            202-225-2511

Jeff Denham                                  202-225-4540

Ed Royce                                       202-225-4111

John Campbell                               202-225-5611

Duncan Hunter                              202-225-5672

Dana Rohrabacher                        202-225-2415

Colorado

Doug Lamborn                               202-225-4422

Florida

Senator Marco Rubio                    202-224-3041

Jeff Miller                                       202-225-4136

Steve Southerland                         202-225-5235

Ted Yoho                                       202-225-5744

Ron DeSantis                                 202-225-2706

John Mica                                       202-225-4035

Bill Posey                                        202-225-3671

Richard Nugent                              202-225-1002

Dennis Ross                                   202-225-1252

Tom Rooney                                   202-225-5792

Trey Radel                                      202-225-2536

Georgia

Jack Kingston                                 202-225-5831

Lynn Westmoreland                       202-225-5901

Tom Price                                       202-225-4501

Robert Woodall                               202-225-4272

Austin Scott                                    202-225-6531

Doug Collins                                   202-225-9893

Paul Broun                                      202-225-4101

Phil Gingrey                                    202-225-2931

Tom Graves                                    202-225-5211

Idaho

Senator Mike Crapo                       202-224-6142

Senator James Risch                     202-224-2752

Illinois

Randy Hultgren                              202-225-2576

Indiana

Jackie Walorski                              202-225-3915

Marlin Stutzman                             202-225-4436

Todd Rokita                                    202-225-5037

Larry Bucshon                                202-225-4636

Luke Messer                                  202-228-3021

Iowa

Senator Chuck Grassley               202-224-3744

Steve King                                     202-225-4426

Kansas

Senator Pat Roberts                     202-224-4774

Tim Huelskamp                             202-225-2715

Kevin Yoder                                  202-225-2865

Mike Pompeo                                202-225-6216

Kentucky

Senator Rand Paul                        202-224-4343

Thomas Massie                             202-225-3465

Andy Barr                                       202-225-4706

Louisiana

Senator David Vitter                      202-224-4623

Steve Scalise                                 202-225-3015

John Fleming                                 202-225-2777

William Cassidy                             202-225-3901

Maryland

Andy Harris                                   202-225-5311

Michigan

Bill Huizenga                                 202-225-4401

Justin Amash                                 202-225-3831

Tim Walberg                                  202-225-6276

Candice Miller                                202-225-2106

Kerry Bentivolio                             202-225-8171

Minnesota

Michele Bachmann                       202-225-2331

Mississippi

Alan Nunnelee                               202-225-4306

Steven Palazzo                              202-225-5772

Missouri

Ann Wagner                                  202-225-1621

Blaine   Luetkemeyer                    202-225-2956

Vicki Hartzler                                 202-225-2876

Sam Graves                                  202-225-7041

Billy Long                                       202-225-6536

Jason Smith                                   202-225-4404

Nevada

Senator Dean Heller                     202-224-6244

Mark Amodie                                 202-225-6155

New Jersey

Scott Garrett                                  202-225-4465

New Mexico

Steve Pearce                                 202-225-2365

New York

Tom Reed                                      202-225-3161

Chris Collins                                   202-225-5265

North Carolina

Renee Ellmers                               202-225-4531

Walter Jones                                  202-225-3415

Virginia Foxx                                  202-225-2071

Richard Hudson                             202-225-3715

George Holding                             202-225-3032

Mark Meadows                              202-225-6401

Ohio

Steve Chabot                                202-225-2216

Brad Wenstrup                              202-225-3164

Jim Jordan                                    202-225-2676

Robert Latta                                  202-225-6405

Bill Johnson                                   202-225-5705

Bob Gibbs                                      202-225-6265

Michael Turner                               202-225-6465

Jim Renacci                                   202-225-3876

Oklahoma

Senator Tom Coburn                    202-224-5754

Jim Bridenstine                             202-225-2211

Markwayne Mullin                         202-225-2701

Frank Lucas                                  202-225-5565

James Lankford                            202-225-2132

Oregon

Greg Walden                                 202-225-6730

Pennsylvania

Senator Patrick Toomey                202-224-4254

Scott Perry                                     202-225-5836

Tom Marino                                   202-225-3731

Keith Rothfus                                 202-225-2065

Joseph Pitts                                    202-225-2411

South Carolina

Senator Tim Scott                          202-224-6121

Mark Sanford                                 202-225-3176

Joe Wilson                                      202-225-2452

Jeff Duncan                                    202-225-5301

Trey Gowdy                                    202-225-6030

Mick Mulvaney                               202-225-5501

Tom Rice                                        202-225-9895

South Dakota

Kristi Noem                                     202-225-2801

Tennessee

John Duncan Jr                              202-225-5435

Chuck Fleischmann                        202-225-3271

Scott DesJarlais                              202-225-6831

Diane Black                                     202-225-4231

Marsha Blackburn                          202-225-2811

Stephen Fincher                             202-225-4714

Phil Roe                                          202-225-6356

Texas

Senator John Cornyn                     202-224-2934

Senator Ted Cruz                           202-224-5922

Louie Gohmert                               202-225-3035

Ted Poe                                          202-225-6565

Sam Johnson                                  202-225-4201

Ralph Hall                                       202-225-6673

Jeb Hensarling                               202-225-3484

Joe Barton                                      202-225-2002

John Culberson                              202-225-2571

Kevin Brady                                    202-225-4901

Michael McCaul                             202-225-2401

K. Michael Conaway                      202-225-3605

Kay Granger                                   202-225-5071

Mac Thornberry                             202-225-3706

Randy Weber                                 202-225-2831

Bill Flores                                        202-225-6105

Randy Neugebauer                        202-225-4005

Lamar Smith                                   202-225-4236

Pete Olson                                      202-225-5951

Kenny Marchant                             202-225-6605

Roger Williams                               202-225-9896

Michael Burgess                             202-225-7772

Blake Farenthold                            202-225-7742

John Carter                                     202-225-3864

Pete Sessions                                 202-225-2231

Steve Stockman                             202-225-1555

Utah

Senator Mike Lee                           202-224-5444

Rob Bishop                                     202-225-0453

Christ Stewart                                 202-225-9730

Jason Chaffetz                                202-225-7751

Virginia

Randy Forbes                                 202-225-6365

Robert Hurt                                     202-225-4711

Bob Goodlatte                                202-225-5431

Morgan Griffith                               202-225-3861

Wisconsin

Senator Ron Johnson                   202-224-5323

Paul Ryan                                      202-225-3031

F. James Sensebrenner                202-225-5101

Thomas Petri                                  202-225-2476

Sean Duffy                                      202-225-3365

Wyoming

Senator Mike Enzi                         202-224-3424

Cynthia Lummis                             202-225-2311

The title of this rant is not as snarky as it would appear. Over the past 30 years since the reign of Ronald of Reagan the first, there has been a concerted effort from the business community to “privatize” numerous traditional government services and resources. This effort of course has a lot of money behind it from billionaires such as the Koch brothers through their front organizations such as the Heritage Foundation, American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), Freedom Works to name but a few. It’s quite simple, take something that is part of or is ran by the government, take control of it and earn a profit from it because it is still a needed service. What’s more, not only have they privatized these resources and services, they’ve done so via a monopoly. Thus, they are the only game in town. This isn’t capitalism because no free market exists. It is in fact Oligarchy. Another term for it is Fascism.

It all begins with “The Commons.” You need to understand this concept to understand what has been happening in this country over the past several years. Commons refers to the cultural and natural resources accessible to all members of a society, including natural materials such as air, water, and a habitable earth. These resources are held in common, not owned privately. The resources held in common can include everything from natural resources and common land to software. The commons contains public property and private property, over which people have certain traditional rights. When commonly held property is transformed into private property this process alternatively is termed “enclosure” or more commonly, “privatization.” A person who has a right in, or over, common land jointly with another or others is called a commoner.

Examples of the commons would include the air, water, public parks, road system, public delivery systems, public schools, etc. They are considered to be part of the commons because they are essential and are used by the people. In a sense, our National Government, a government that Abraham Lincoln described as “Government of the people, by the people and for the people” is the manifestation of the Commons. We all own the government and this government has the responsibility to the people who theoretically control it.

So government services are part of the Commons. This would include police, military, schools, social services, the Courts, the prisons, the docks, the interstate highway system, all used and controlled by the people through their representative government. It is done is such a way that the taxes needed to run these systems are spent in an as efficient way as possible for the greater return on the money spent. If not done so, the people can respond by going to the government that they run and demand redress and correction. This is how it has been since our founding. However, seeing the potential profit involved by taking these services and institutions needed by the people away from government and privatized, many of these services have been corrupted. You can’t approach a corporation for redress like you can your government.

It started slow and harmlessly enough. Our constitution actually provides for “Postal Roads” for delivery of the mail, over time this was the impetus to create a road system that connected communities and states. They were built with government funds and maintained by the government. Some took it upon themselves to build and open “toll roads”. They did so by buying up the rights to the lands involved and agree to maintain these roads. They are also allowed to of course charge a toll for using these roads to fund the maintenance. This took a burden off the state, gave it to the private sector and in theory saved the state money. However the state still maintained public road systems that ran parallel to the toll systems. Though not as well maintained or quick as the toll system, they were free for those who couldn’t afford to pay to drive. It was a balance that was accepted. The railroads used the government to take control of lands to build the nations railroad system. For the most part, these were private industries that used private lands to ship people and material across the nation for a cost. However, they had a unique relationship with government where even though the owners made profits over the endeavor, the Federal government had some control and leverage ensuring people were safe and it was affordable to use.

The electric grid and water delivery systems were and are a mutual effort between government and private sources. Most water delivery systems are ran by local governments for water that is still very much a part of the commons. After all, no one can survive without water. Delivering that water does cost money to maintain the infrastructure. It is paid for via taxes and or fees to the delivery systems that are either publicly owned or are private entities enjoying special privileges with local government ensuring the people aren’t left dry. It is concerning that the President of Nestle is actually on record advocating the privatization of the water supply, not the delivery system. The way things have been going, he could get away with it.

Time to get to the focus of this rant, government services.

As I mentioned above, government services, those things government does for the people who consent to their rule are part of the commons. This includes police, military, fire-fighting, social security, Medicare, Medicaid, Public Schools, Head Start, EPA, FDA, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATF, the list goes on. If these agencies fail to meet the standards of the people who they are in place to serve, we have the constitutional right to redress our grievances with government for correction.

However, if these services were to be provided by private sector sources, we have no such right. At best, you need to hire an attorney and file suit in Court. What has made matters worse is a recent Supreme Court Decision that limits the ability to file class action lawsuits. So if a Corporation with billions did something wrong that impacted you, it’s your ability to pay for attorneys versus theirs. Not an easy endeavor.

Time was fire fighters were almost exclusively private sector institutions. Some volunteer and government operated systems were in place to put out fires no matter what. However like in Chicago during the Great Fire, the various Fire Departments would only respond to those who paid for their services first. We know what happened. Recently fire departments have started to go back to being privately owned. There have been recent incidents where a home has caught fire but because the owner didn’t pay their dues to the department, the home was left to burn, endangering the neighbors nearby.

The most discussed privatization of government services you will see on blogs, twitter and the like is the Prison system.

Traditionally the prisons were built and ran by the government. Taxes and fines paid for the operation. Then the private prison corporations came into being. They went to Governors of various states and convinced them they could house and control inmates for less cost per inmate and that they should be given title to the existing prisons or build new ones to house them. Of course in order to stay in business, unlike government run institutions, private prisons must make a profit to operate and get more investments from stockholders.

So they cut costs in security, medical care, psychological treatment, and training of staff. All things to squeeze a profit out of the tax dollars per inmate they take in. But it didn’t stop there.

Using ALEC, they sponsored laws that resulted in the Courts having no choice but to place more people in Prison for “crimes” that never really carried time before. The most infamous example of this is in my home state of Arizona. The infamous SB1070 law otherwise known as the “Papers Please” law, in reality had nothing to do with curbing illegal immigration. It was written by ALEC, pushed by the prison corporation folks to State Senator Russell Pearce, Governor Jan Brewer and others to permit local Sheriff’s like Joe Arpiao to arrest “undocumented” aliens he couldn’t arrest before and house them in new prisons especially created for this law.

More people in prison at more cost to the Arizona Tax Payer. This law was pushed in other States for the same reason. There was a population of people who weren’t being housed at tax payer expense before because there was truly no reason for it. If they committed an actually criminal offense they could be housed for that. This forced incarceration on them for simply being here without papers.

The prison corporations have been over the years pushing for mandatory prison sentences for crimes that never carried imprisonment before in order to fill beds and get more money from the tax payer. Once the beds are filled, security is lax, treatment is sub humane and these people come out far worse than they went in. This, along with the “War on Drugs” is the major reason why our country has more people behind bars per capita than any other country on Earth.

Then there is the military.

Time was, the military clothed, fed and took care of itself when in any war theatre. They were trained to build barracks, cook food, provide medical care, and do their own security both here and abroad. That changed when the Federal Government began to privatize military support services. Instead of these people taking care of themselves, private contractors, who cost the government far more than the military charged itself came in to build barracks and bases, feed and secure military personnel.

Infamously was the time military personnel were electrocuted in a shower build by one of these contractors. Keep in mind that under Bush/Cheney, these contractors got these cushy assignments on no-bid contracts. Their work was shoddy, expensive, poorly distributed and even resulted in death. Further, under law the soldiers had no recourse to address these issues in Court or with the owners of these companies. They were immune from criminal and civil liabilities. Attempts to change this in Congress were thwarted by those representatives who got campaign contributions from these no bid contractors. They were and are more expensive than traditional use of military personnel for these services and what’s more not as good in providing services. All of this costs the tax payer more money for worse results.

Then there are the Intelligence Services.

What can be said? Our nation has secrets that need to be kept for our national security, we have operations around the world to gather and analyze intelligence to warn and protect us from potential terroristic threats both here and abroad. This was once the total venue of the Federal Government. Then they decided to bring private contractors into the fold. It wasn’t a cost saving endeavor because the known budgets for these services have skyrocketed as had the number of people no longer answerable directly to our government but only to their corporate heads, who now have top security clearance.

Enter Edward Snowden. An employee of a private contractor, not vetted or controlled by anyone in government, not answerable to anyone outside of his company, who was able to gain access to top security material and leave with it. He hasn’t been the only one. How has privatization of intelligence services saved the tax payers any money or made us more secure and safe? It has done quite the opposite as had every instance where government services have been taken away from government and privatized for the profit of a handful of CEOs, Corporate owners and stockholders.

It’s a simple paradigm, to make profit you need to reduce cost and increase revenue. You reduce costs by cutting corners, removing safeguards, redundancies, etc and you increase revenues by finding ways of getting the customer base to pay you more while you provide less. As tax payers we are the customer base, there is a lot of money that is collected by us that private industry would love to get their hands on for more profit. When government provides these services they do so in as efficient way as possible providing the most bang for the buck and hopefully getting a return on the investment that is used to make the system even better. Private Industry in profit driven, their goal is to get the most buck from whatever they do regardless of quality of service. Profits rule and anything that cuts into profit is frowned upon by the stockholders.

This is where we are with the growing privatization of government services.

Privatize schools; fewer children get the proper education for the costs involved.

Privatize Medicare/Medicaid fewer patients get quality care for the costs involved because medical care is expensive and trying to squeeze a profit out of it only makes it even more expensive.

Privatize Social Security the only people guaranteed to make money are the Wall Street types who trade your money in speculative transactions in order to make themselves a profit on your tax dollars.

Privatize prisons you end up with more people in prison costing tax payers more to house them time and time again because they are treated so poorly they recidivate even more.

Privatize fire departments then fires have a greater chance of spreading because not every property is paying dues directly to the company running the department.

Privatize military; you pay more to CEOs and contractors and less to the very people who put their lives on the line defending you.

Privatize intelligence services; you get less intelligence, more leaks and a bigger bill at the end.

This trend must stop.

Capitalism and the private sector have plenty to occupy their time with. Building cars, televisions, appliances, and big ticket items in a free market is a good thing and no government can compete in that. That is communism and it is a proven failure. However privatization of government services, those things we need to rely upon at the best cost and the best overall service, the commons are best left to Government. Government has no profit margin to adhere by, only the satisfaction and needs of the governed who are able to bring redress immediately back to them. To allow continued privatization of government services has two names, Oligarchy and Fascism, private industry control of government and the nation. This must end. We need to reverse what has already begun; it’s time to nationalize our Federal Government for the people of this country and their well-being.

I’ll discuss Nationalizing Koch Industries in another rant. This is a poor attempt on my part to try to explain this situation, but it does exist and it does concern me. The facts of this phenomenon are out there for all of you to read and digest. Hopefully some true journalists will bring this to the forefront in a better way than I have. Thanks for reading.

It’s been described as a kamikaze attack in political circles, the threat of creating a situation where the possibility of a government shutdown and or default on our national debt over the long since settled issue of “Obamacare.” Despite the Affordable Care Act being passed by both chambers of Congress, signed by the President and upheld as “constitutional” by a very “conservative” Supreme Court, a small minority of very loud and narrow-minded fanatics who align themselves with the Koch funded “Tea Party” movement are convinced they speak for the majority of Americans. (At least those people they consider to be American) The interesting dichotomy is that although a slight majority of Americans in fact do not favor what is termed “ObamaCare”, all of the individual components of ACA enjoy large majorities of support. This is a fact. Other facts that these fanatics refuse to accept or address in their talking points:

• ACA does not take any insurance away from anyone who already has it. It only assists in giving access to those who don’t have it and can’t afford it.
• ACA, though still not fully implemented has already slowed the increase in health insurance premiums and in some cases has even lowered them.
• ACA has provided affordable comprehensive health insurance to 30 million Americans who would not have any access to insurance were it not for its existence.
• In order for a private insurance company to be part of the “Exchange” they are submitting bids of comprehensive affordable coverage. This is essentially the free market working to provide coverage and not “socialized” healthcare as those on the right would like to point out. This is Capitalism, not Socialism.
• The most affordable comprehensive healthcare systems with the best overall results for the least cost to the consumer and tax payers are in countries that have what is termed “Socialized Medicine.”
• We are the only industrialized nation that does not guarantee all of their citizens comprehensive healthcare.
• Not having everyone insured makes healthcare more expensive for those who have insurance and results in the health of the nation being worse which impacts economic production and health for the entire nation.
• ACA is not the best solution to our nations’ healthcare situation. However it is far better than what came before and the Republican Party can offer no alternative to it because in reality, this was their idea from the 1990’s and they refuse to admit it.
• Currently private insurance companies can and will deny coverage and service that impacts their profit margin even if it means death and the consumer prior to “ObamaCare” had no recourse. Government regulation of Healthcare looks for and implements efficiencies for the best outcomes without consideration of profit. There are NO DEATH PANELS IN OBAMACARE. If you are looking for death panels, look to Ted Cruz and his minions who work to deny health insurance to 30 million American men, women and children who would have no access to affordable comprehensive healthcare without ACA. The Tea Party are the Death Panels.

Intelligent and reasonable people in both parties clearly understand that the Tea Party stunt of trying to defund ObamaCare is doomed for failure as has the previous 40 plus votes. They know it. Ted Cruz is trying to set himself up as the favorite for the GOP nod in 2016 with the fanatic base who do not realize that one; you cannot defund ObamaCare, that money has already been appropriated and two; there are dire outcomes if government is shut down and or we default on the National debt.

Cruz knows full well that his stalling tactic in the Senate means that John Boehner must immediately place the new Continuing Resolution up for a vote that would require almost all Democrats and a few reasonable Republicans to pass by Monday or the government will shut down.

We went through this before. We know the outcome of a government shutdown. Hundreds of thousands of government employees will lose their pay immediately; essential services will cease or will be delayed. With the loss of income to these employees comes the loss of money circulating in our economy resulting in private sector job losses. The stock market will take a plunge due to this as well as our credit rating.

The reason our only recently re-acquired AAA rating was slashed before was because of the indecisive and obstructionist Republican House not working across the aisle or with the President. If they take this to the debt ceiling debate, the promise to pay bills already acquired by the actions of our government, the world economy will collapse. This is a fact that reasonable intelligent people understand. Only narcissistic self centered politicians preying on the stupidity and gullibility of a loud vocal group of lemmings would sacrifice the health of the world’s economy by trying to take healthcare away from people who currently can’t afford it.

The GOP leadership hates Ted Cruz and they are frustrated with the narrow-minded Tea Party Faction. The current game plan has been cited as Kamikaze Politics. That is apt; they destroy the economy and themselves. Those pushing this are too into themselves and don’t care about the nation’s health as well as the nation’s and world’s economy. If left unchecked and unchallenged, we could easily have a repeat of prior economic collapse that could easily grow into another worldwide depression. All this only because Ted Cruz, who keeps a large oil painting of himself in his office to keep him “grounded” thinks he has a chance of being president. The only thing he has the chance of doing is destroying this nation because too many idiots like him and too few reasonable people vote. This must change.

The Tea Party is bad for the physical, mental and economic health of the nation. They must be removed from all elected offices nationwide in 2014 or matters will only get worse. Get active, get registered and vote.

There’s no getting past the fact that today we remember what happened twelve years ago. Over the past dozen years the issues leading up to the attacks have been researched and debated as well as the aftermath. Although not everyone agrees to every theory or explanation of what happened before and what has happened since, there are some things that are beyond dispute. Osama bin Laden, the leader of al Qaeda, organized a terrorist attack on the soil of the United States. The hijackers were mostly Saudi Arabian as was bin Laden. They planned this over the course of years as a follow up to a similar attack on the Twin Towers during the Clinton Administration. On August 6, 2001 President Bush was given a “Presidential Daily Briefing” entitled “bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States.” Various intelligence sources had the pieces, but failed to put them together. They carried out the attack and were successful in killing over 3,000 innocent people to include Americans, Europeans, Christians, Jews, Atheists, and Muslims. The majority of the world was outraged at this attack, one group in Egypt known as the “Muslim Brotherhood” was among the first to condemn the attack. Since then, due to the poor decisions of the Bush Cheney Administration and their NeoCon and PNAC advisors, world sympathy turned against us, and we are now over $3 trillion more in debt, Iran is more powerful, the Middle East is actually in many ways more unstable than before 9-11, we’ve given up many of our freedoms by accepting the provisions of the Patriot Act, and far more Americans have died in a poorly conceived and unnecessary war than were killed on that single day. It took another President to initiate a daring assault to kill the one man who orchestrated the attack and it was done quickly, cleanly and no Americans died.

Leading up to this anniversary three of our most “interesting” Members of Congress (Steve King, Michele Bachmann, Louie Gohmert) went to Egypt to expressed their support for the Egyptian Coup that took place and cited how the Egyptian people and the American people share the same enemy, the Muslim Brotherhood, who Michele Bachmann implied were responsible for 9-11. She appears to be oblivious to the facts that the Brotherhood has never been associated with al Qaeda and was among the first to condemn the attack. Wonkette posted a very good piece on this issue today:

http://wonkette.com/527980/congresscritters-bachmann-gohmert-king-love-egyptian-coup-think-muslim-brotherhood-did-911

And here is their statement:

Sad how a member of the House Intelligence Committee would be so oblivious to reality. When I saw the video, the image caused me to think of other Stooges who made their name by quite simply being Stooges. These three do a lot together; the three seem to always be on the same page on every issue. All three are heroes of the Tea Party, All three are famous for idiotic statements, all three have made bigoted statements oblivious to their audience, and all three are Stooges. When I saw this I thought of doing this post and looked for a photo to demonstrate the obvious nature of these three. I was surprised to see that no one has thought to do this before. Fortunately I was able to approach my talented friend @Ziletrezo and asked him to create the picture above. A picture after all is worth a thousand word salad.

Who are these Stooges?

Steve (Larry Fine) King is from Iowa. He’s famous for supporting dog fighting, saying that it’s legal for a pedophile to impregnate a girl, kidnap her and take her across state lines for an abortion and bring her back.

Louie (Curley) Gohmert is from Texas. He’s famous for warning Americans of Muslim “Terror Babies” being brought to our shores and given American Citizenship. He, like his fellow Stooges are convinced that ObamaCare is a threat to national security and freedom and will force the government of the United States to be shut down in order to stop it. They will all destroy America to save America from getting affordable Healthcare.

Finally, Michele (Moe) Bachmann. What more can anyone say about her. She speaks at every opportunity to explain how there are Communists, or Muslim Brotherhood, or Satan Worshippers, or Space Aliens, whatever her current fancy may be in the halls of Government in Washington DC. Whereas Sarah Palin speaks in Word Salad, Michele speaks in Chef Word Salad. She ran for President and as a result of that undertaking is now facing Federal Campaign Finance Fraud Allegations from the Department of Justice. She’s decided to not run again, but this has nothing to do with that investigation that could easily result in her imprisonment. She says so, why doubt her. She’s also very anti homosexual, along with her closeted homosexual husband Marcus. She’s opposed to government handouts, despite owing her millions in revenue to government handouts via Farm subsidies, her government paycheck as a former IRS attorney and now Congresswoman, and funding for running her “pray the gay away” clinics with Marcus.

In fact all three of these Stooges are millionaires from money they have received from State and Federal Tax Payers. But they oppose anyone else getting any money and oppose anyone above the middle-class ever having to pay any taxes to support their lifestyles.

They say that humans tend to seek out and associate with their own kind. This is true. I’ve found that the more insecure you are, the more unable you are to express your stated positions to others who may disagree, the more extreme you are in your beliefs, morals and lacking in intellect, the more you congregate with your own kind. Steve, Michele and Louie can always be seen together because they are all so much alike. They are adored by the Tea Party fanatics because like these Stooges, they also are extreme in their views and unable to express their beliefs in an intelligent manner to the majority of the rest of the nation.

The original three Stooges were in my humble opinion endearing, lovable and funny because they played the role of Stooge for laughs. These new Stooges are scary and dangerous because they are truly idiots and with their limited power in government, place us all in peril.

Only you can get people like this out of office by voting.

Those who follow my Twitter Time Line may have seen my discussion with a voter ID proponent and one of his friends that began the evening of August 28th and ended on August 29th.

Here was his reasoning, which are the common talking points why there should be voter ID.

To avoid voter fraud

To ensure the person voting is eligible to vote

All adults need ID to survive in this country so what’s the big deal?

In the course of the discussion he added that:

Only disabled veterans should be allowed to vote via mail.

The Black Panthers are intimidating people at the polls.

Regardless, all voting should be done on one day and people can wait in line.

ID that is necessary will only be required at “registration” not at the polls.

Mitt Romney got zero votes in precincts in Philadelphia.

Requiring voter ID isn’t racist or places an undue burden on anyone, including the poor.

Here’s the deal with voting ID from my perspective:

Voting is not only a right, it’s a responsibility.

Despite what the proponents of voter ID say, there remains zero evidence of people voting who are not permitted to vote.

In fact, an “undocumented” alien faces over a year in Federal Prison if they are caught trying to vote.

Let’s be honest here, would you risk a year in prison to vote in an election where that vote would have little to no impact on the outcome and no benefit to you whatsoever? Its stupid thinking. There is no voter fraud in this country, at least not enough to have any impact on any election. No history of voter fraud could be found despite the efforts of the Republicans to find it since 2000 to justify their efforts to show cause for enacting what are clearly voter suppression laws. It’s a red herring for those who don’t think for themselves and eat up whatever crap they are served.

The fraud in this country is clearly that of vote counting.

Voter ID has no impact on addressing the fraud in counting the votes. The fraud comes from voting machines that keep no paper record of their count, from companies who keep the algorithms for these machines secret even from State officials wanting to check out their accuracy.

Vote counting fraud is real, there is a history of it and with electronic voting machines, and recounts are in most cases no longer available. However, for vote counting fraud to actually impact an outcome, you need to limit the number of people voting. Limit that number by means of voter caging (taking registered voters off the voting polls without notice) and of course, requiring voter ID at the polling booth. They aren’t advocating it just for registration. As Paul Weyrich, GOP strategist and founder of ALEC (who wrote the voter ID laws for all the states implementing them) the Republican do better with fewer people voting. See the clip below. This is their game.

Now this guy also added that everyone needs ID to survive in this country. That actually isn’t true. Those in rural areas, nursing homes, shut-ins, homeless actually do get by without ID or with ID’s that the voter ID laws don’t permit them to use to vote. They are in fact eligible to vote, they just can’t get the ID’s these laws require. They do not permit Student ID, Social Security Cards, Government Assistance ID’s, only certain ID’s that usually cost people money and/or require them to provide information they can’t get without a lot of effort and cost like birth certificates. Married women who had their names changed often can’t meet the challenge to provide proof of birth to get an ID in their current name because their birth certificates are in their maiden names. This has been happening in Pennsylvania, where incidentally the guy I was Tweeting with says he’s from.

Those who have analyze the Pennsylvania voter ID laws have clearly shown with validated data that requiring ID’s would negatively impact 74% of women, minorities, elderly who tend to vote Democratic. It’s no secret that is the reason these laws were passed. If they simply want all eligible voters to present an ID at the polls, provide them to all registered voters free of charge without requiring them to travel or pay anything beyond their capabilities. But that is not what the ID’s are for.

This guy also mentioned the “Black Panthers” intimidating people at the polls. How voter ID would solve that problem he didn’t say. Now we all know that there are about 4 members of the Black Panthers still around. So they must really be moving from polling place to polling place. I pointed out to this guy the “True the Vote” organization that proudly boasts their intent to keep minorities from voting. It’s their mission statement, they have a website. He questioned their existence. See the links below.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_the_Vote

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rob-richie/true-the-vote-fudges-numb_b_2785093.html

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/true-vote/

He also believes that voting by mail should be eliminated unless you are a disabled veteran. He first thought that voting by mail was fine until I pointed out to him that voter ID wouldn’t work for those people who vote by mail. It was only then that he modified his view to only disabled veterans should have that capability, everyone else should not only vote at the polls, they should all do it on one day and stay in line.

Anyone who has looked at the situation and used simple logic and common sense know that voter ID aren’t required because there is no voter fraud where people who shouldn’t be voting are voting. That is a fact. There is however plenty of evidence that the Republicans understand that the fewer people who vote, the better they do in the outcomes. They are on tape saying it. They also push for vote counting machines that have been proven to be easily manipulated to misrepresent the tally which is why many jurisdictions are now removing them. They use groups like “True the Vote” to keep minorities away from the polls. They remove ballot machines from heavily democratic districts making those lines longer while placing plenty of them in Republican leaning districts so it presents them no problem. They want to eliminate early voting, vote by mail and require all Americans to vote on a work day knowing there could be long lines to complete a ballot that may take several minutes or more to complete. This is to discourage voting, not encourage it. It is to keep the numbers low so the results can be manipulated to their favor. This is the voting fraud in this country.

As we approach the midterms, it is very important that despite the obstacles the right has put up to keep you from voting, you do so anyway. If you are still allowed to vote by mail or early vote, do it. Of course make sure you are registered and verify that you registration is still good. Use this link below to regularly check your registration.

Florida is only one of several states including Arizona that regularly removes people from the polls based on some obscure procedure and end up not telling people they lost their registration. They only find out when they go to the polls. So check regularly.

Voter Caging Information:

http://projectvote.org/voter-caging.html

Check your voter registration:

http://www.canivote.org/

How to register to vote:

http://registertovote.org/index.html?utm_source=Google&utm_medium=CPC&utm_term=voter%2Bregistration&utm_content=Register&utm_campaign=Arizona%2B-%2BIP

Finally, even if you have to vote in person on voting day, don’t let the lines keep you from the polls. Show up and demand your right to vote. Don’t let “True the Vote” brown shirts intimidate you. If you can, take a day off from work and expect to be there a while. Use the Courts to demand that sufficient voting machines are provided in your precinct so you and others can vote. Don’t just roll your eyes and do nothing, get active and get active now to prepare for 2014. Low voter turnout will only bring more right wing nut jobs in office to make your life more miserable so they can make the rich even richer with no responsibility for American individual needs. Higher voter turnout often results in Progressive wins. Although Nate Silver says it is currently impossible for the Democrats to take back the House, he’s basing this on average voter turnout for midterms and gerrymandered districts. However, if voter turnout is at record highs, and you engage Republicans and Independents in your district to think about how this current House is making their lives more unstable for political and 1% gains, maybe they’ll vote the Republicans out. Many are bigoted, racist, misogynist and homophobic, but not all of them. Reach them; convince them that to vote Republican is to vote to continue Bigoted, Racist, Misogynistic and Homophobic policies. The vast majority of the nation is opposed to that, sadly the vast majority of the nation won’t vote during midterms. This is what we need to change.

Too many brave activists literally gave up their lives so everyone could exercise their right to vote, don’t let the GOP and their ignorant followers dishonor their legacy.

Get active and get out the vote.

I really can’t add too much of note or inspiration to what was said 50 years ago today by Martin Luther King and today by our President. Take the time to play and listen to both speeches with open minds and hearts and draw your own conclusions. Consider what has happened in this nation during these past 50 years.

However I will add that the journey still continues; we must keep moving, we have a long way to go to honor by our actions the words and actions of these two extraordinary men. We must continue to march.

On August 28, 2013 President Obama will give a speech to commemorate the “I’ve Have a Dream” speech and many are speculating on what he will say and how he will say it. Here’s what the President has to contend with from 50 years ago:

This speech is a tough act to follow, even after 50 years. The president by the mere fact that he is the President is the best follow-up to what has been described as one of the greatest civil rights speeches in history. But many have forgotten all of what Martin Luther King had to say on that day. That’s why I posted the link above. Please hear the entire speech. He had so much more to say than that he had a dream that people would judge others by the content of their character and not the color of their skin (while I’m on the subject, I did not vote for Obama because of the color of his skin, there have been many black candidates who ran for President before him, I voted for him because of his message, because of the “content of his character”). The focus of this speech was to rally all Americans to fight for the rights of all Americans.

The March on Washington was for Jobs and Freedom. Many of those who spoke before Martin Luther King focused on the extremely liberal view that all Americans regardless of race, ethnicity, or creed deserved jobs. It was more than just being able to “buy a hamburger but to be able to pay for that hamburger” as MLK once remarked.

King mentioned that “1963 wasn’t the end of the struggle but the beginning.” This was before the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act were passed by Congress. King also made mention on that day that along with the “Negros” in the crowd, were Whites. He remarked that those whites knew their needs were intertwined with the needs of the Blacks. This wasn’t for just the “Negros”, this was for all Americans of all categories. All deserved equal rights, equal treatment and dignity.

Most importantly in his remarks was the fact that all those who struggled for those rights must do so nonviolently and there shouldn’t be hatred for all whites because many whites were there too demanding the same rights. He remarked that those who struggled shouldn’t “degenerate to physical violence” and should be “meeting physical force with soul force.” It was a call for a disciplined and honorable fight to bring rights to all Americans regardless of the anger, hatred and violence those who oppose them may present.

50 years later, an angry mob represented by those who call themselves the Tea Party have fought to take rights away from Americans. Funded by the money interests who demand more freedom for themselves and less for the average Americans have been the loud voice that permitted State Houses, Congress and the Supreme Court to take away voting rights and civil rights that many have shed their blood for in the 1960’s. They are using the anger, violence and threats that Martin Luther King cautioned the civil rights “Freedom Riders” to not use.

So what should President Obama say on Wednesday?

He should follow up with what King called for in 1963, he should rally all Americans to recognize the plight of all Americans and fight for the rights of all Americans.

He needs to renew the struggle to return the protections of the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act that do apply to all Americans regardless of the political affiliation. He should demand that we refrain from the intellectually shallow and hurtful anger utilized by the Tea Party Activists and learn the facts of the world around us. Then have open conversations with others and then follow up by utilizing our civic duty to vote for the candidate that best represents and will provide not only what we want, but what we need.

He should renew the call to action that King started in 1963 because it’s not over. 50 years later we see that this struggle may never be over. There will always be those of selfish intent and inhumane reasoning who will coerce and con the intellectually lazy to do their bidding and destroy the fabric and promise of this nation.

We are the People of the United States of America. We are the Government, We are not Corporations. We are flesh and blood Americans who need to look out for ourselves by looking out for others, whether we like them or not. The only way we can effectively do that is to be political aware, politically active and vote in all elections. Otherwise we are merely spectators to the demise of our rights and privileges as taken away from us by the rich and powerful.

President Obama, tell us to be responsible American Citizens looking out for one another, nothing more nothing less.

Oh, and maybe remind Americans of Martin Luther King’s warning to all on August 28, 1963 that “Those who hoped that the Negro needed to blow off steam and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation returns to business as usual.”

The Koch sponsored Tea Party are trying to bring us back to business as usual. Lets stop that now.