Still being new to blogging I want to try something here. Not sure if there will be sufficient interest or not or how it will go, but I’m going to at least give it a try.

Today, before his campaign took it back, Mitt Romney stated what he would keep from Obamacare. Specifically the pre-existing conditions. Well, now that more people have experienced some provisions of the Affordable Care Act, more people seem to be liking it and though they still hate “ObamaCare” they like most if not all of the provisions.

At the bottom is a “Leave A Reply” Box. Add your comment about what you like about ObamaCare and forward this to your friends. Let’s see what people like and send a message (at least to those who view this blog) about what is liked about the Affordable Care Act.

I’ll start. Being someone who suffer from Type 1 Diabetes for the past 41 years and still being too young for Medicare, I like the provision preventing insurance companies from excluding me from coverage and elimination of the lifetime caps.

I have more, but I want to hear from you.

Please participate. Be patient if your reply isn’t immediately posted. I have to allow the post and I’m not always near a computer that allows me to authorize the reply.

Thanks.

This rant requires little to no research, it’s all anecdotal and comes from what I’ve experienced in recent months and from what I’ve been told.

We like to rail against the right-wing for being rude, obnoxious and uncivil to those of us who support a position that they don’t. Those who know my history know that I registered as a Republican in 1979 when I turned 18. Although I never voted a straight GOP ticket (opting to vote for those I thought were the most qualified) I did in fact vote for many Republicans over the years. Truth be told, they were the more moderate, intellectual and sincere Republicans who like me, were more interested in solving the country’s problems than maintaining some power for the party. In short, they placed city, county, state and nation before party. That feeling of mine has never changed.

Of course over the years, the Republican party has moved ever farther to the right to the point of insanity. More and more they started developing a litmus test about what “a true Republican” was. The liberal, moderate, and intellectual conservatives have more and more been marginalized, ridiculed and forced out of office. Many times they have been forced out of the party. There is truth to the saying “I didn’t leave the Republican party, it left me.”

So after 2010 when I saw the most extreme elements of the American Taliban (The Tea Party) not only take over the Republican Party, but took over the House of Representatives and many Governorships and State legislatures spouting racist and provably wrong rhetoric, I decided enough was enough and I left the Republican Party. However in my early days on Twitter I was still part of the GOP and stated so on my bio. This of course resulted in right-wing trolls gunning for me and gleefully exclaiming that I was a RINO (Republican In Name Only). As the McAvoy character in “The Newsroom” so brilliantly pointed out in one episode, those in the Tea Party (the American Taliban) are the true RINOs. However, not wanting them to consider themselves liars, I left the party.

Over time, even Andrew Breitbart himself went after me, bringing in all his Twitter buddies to harass and insult me saying that I “was no moderate” that in fact I was a bleeding heart liberal for the simple reason I didn’t see things the way they did. Well as many like to point out, Reagan, Goldwater, Nixon, and a whole host of other successful Republican Conservatives would today be called liberal. My views never changed, I have some admittedly liberal views on some issues, some conservative views on others, and I see nothing wrong with having liberal views because we all know honestly, when questioned enough on enough issues, everybody has what can be considered a liberal view on some facet of life somewhere.

So the right-wing insults, harass, and ridicules me. So guess what? I return the favor and do the same to them. Turnabout is fair play and I like to think I play pretty good. I still have a lot of GOP still in me and I know how they think and how they operate so it’s not problem to handle them, if I chose. Best thing to do as I posted a while back with Right Wing Trolls is to simply ignore and block. Communicating with them is what they want because then they get posted to your time-line and followers and get more exposure than they deserve. Odd thing is, it’s now a rare day I get assaulted on Twitter by a RWNJ anymore. Maybe they gave up? Who knows.

So we all enjoy being uncivil to those on the other side because they are uncivil by nature. So uncivil they have attacked and assaulted their own kind resulting in many leaving the party. Their Big Tent is more and more becoming a Pup Tent by their use of litmus tests for “true conservative Republicans” and in doing so have driven out blacks, Hispanics, Native Americans, Women, Homosexuals, the list goes on. Many of these people either switch to the Democratic Party, go Independent or remain Republican with the intent of voting against their party.

But now to why this rant. Those of us on this side of the aisle are not immune to the behavior of those on the right. I’m starting to see it more and more. Many on the extreme edges of the left’s ideology and establishing criteria for membership. There was the argument regarding the “Professional Left” that went way out of hand and resulted in depressing moderate and left-wing voter turn-out in 2010 that helped the American Taliban take over so many offices. And it continues.

Soon after I started this blog, I did a post regarding what is an American. I opined that I honestly believe that the only criteria of being American is being here. We are too diverse on so many levels. Well, a follower who had followed me from nearly the beginning took exception to that blog. Although we had both RT each other’s posts over the years, the mere fact that I mentioned that even those on the right who opine their views are Americans insulted him that he felt a need to insult me back. I tried to remain reasonable, above the fray as he became more and more angry with me. It ended up with him unfollowing and blocking me. This is what those on the other side do, and sadly we’re starting to do the same.

A good friend of mine on Twitter DM’d me over some issues involving those who have left-wing blogs recently that resulted in quite frankly childish behavior, unfollows, blocks and very hard feelings. I know each and every one of these people. Overall they are on the same page, they fight for the same goals, yet they are now not talking to each other and slam each other on posts.

Perhaps this is human nature, but it is also self-defeating for our cause to have and maintain a Big Tent. Strength comes from diversity and tolerance of that diversity. You don’t have to agree on each and every issue, but you can agree to be civil with each other, allow each other to express their views and shake hands and agree to disagree. That is what makes any society stronger and more welcoming to others.

I am not a journalist, I never took any classes in college regarding journalism. I do not produce anything remotely covered by the traditional ethics and morals of journalism. I am merely someone who tweets his opinions on Twitter and has this blog.

This blog, by the way is as amateur as it gets. It has no board of ethics, no advertisers, nothing but what I believe needs to be said. I’m a citizen expressing his views to anyone who cares to read them. They are not forced upon anyone and if you don’t like what you read here, then don’t read it. I swore no oath or signed any contract saying that I should give equal time or thought to differing opinions.

If I do print up differing opinions, it’s out of the kindness of my heart or more to the point, to try to be fair in presenting my views. Again, I’m not under any ethical requirement to be completely factually correct and fair to both sides. This is a Blog, no rules apply.

The problem is Mainstream Media in recent years have become for lack of a better term, corporate blogs with the same lack of integrity. Considering their money and influence, they control the narrative, and the rest of us must listen without the opportunity to hear opposing views presented in the same venue with the same aura of authority that the corporate mainstream media has. Why is that?

Let us begin at the beginning (makes sense doesn’t it). After the failings of the “Articles of Confederation” the Congress felt it was necessary to create a document that would create a more cohesive and mutually dependant form of government between the states. They began the Constitutional Convention to correct the weaknesses the Articles of Confederation created. It looked at codifying rights into government of and by the people so that the people controlled the government, not the other way around. And by people, they meant of course White Male Property Owners. At the time, minorities, women, indigent people, let alone Corporations weren’t considered actual people with the intellect, morals or intellect to decide how the country should go. So they installed these rights into the new Constitution.

One of those rights they wanted to instill was actually placed in the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of
the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the
Government for a redress of grievances.

People often forget the line here saying that Congress shall not prohibit the free exercise of freedom of speech or of the press. The concept of a free and unobstructed press was so important to inform the people of what was happening so they could have an educated base to make decisions on, that the US Postal Service was required to mail such newspapers and pamphlets essentially free of charge. An informed public is a necessity if you are to have government of the people. If the people are not informed enough to make decisions, then a hierarchy of nobility, wealth and influence become the rulers of government, not the people.

Thing is, in the beginning all views were presented to the people because government couldn’t abridge those views. Although Conservative President John Adams actually tried to do it by having James Callender, a man who was printing complaints about his administration, arrested and charge for violation of the Alien and Sedition Acts. He was fined $200.00 and jailed for nine months. In all, twenty-five people were arrested, eleven tried and ten convicted for expressing their political views in the open.

It caused such an outrage that Thomas Jefferson used it as a campaign plank to win his election to the Presidency for himself and his newly formed political party the “Democratic-Republicans” who still exist today and are known simply as the Democratic Party. The Acts were repealed and safeguards were codified into law to protect “freedom of the press.”

So protections to freedom of the press (expression) from government and government officials were codified. However, something the founders didn’t expect began to occur. it became easier, faster and more profitable to print out newspapers and pamphlets and as a result, the publishers who owned these papers began to become very wealthy. As they became wealthy their audience began to grow as did their influence. So instead of worrying about undue influence from government in getting all the facts out to the people for an educated and informed public to make decisions about governance, corporations began to rule the information machinery of the country. This brings us to William Randolph Hearst.

In 1887 Hearst entered the publishing field. In time he created the world’s largest newspaper and magazine business. He was able to influence government by influencing the people with his stories.

As Martin Lee and Norman Solomon noted in their 1990 book Unreliable Sources, Hearst “routinely invented sensational stories, faked interviews, ran phony pictures and distorted real events.” This approach came to be known as “yellow journalism.”

Hearst’s use of yellow journalism techniques in his New York Journal to whip up popular support for U.S. military adventurism in Cuba, Puerto Rico and the Philippines in 1898 was also criticized in Upton Sincair’s 1919 book, The Brass Check: A Study of American Journalism. According to Sinclair, Hearst’s newspaper employees were “willing by deliberate and shameful lies, made out of whole cloth, to stir nations to enmity and drive them to murderous war.” Sinclair also asserted that in the early 20th century Hearst’s newspapers lied “remorselessly about radicals,” excluded “the word Socialist from their columns” and obeyed “a standing order in all Hearst offices that American Socialism shall never be mentioned favorably.” In addition, Sinclair charged that Hearst’s “Universal News Bureau” re-wrote the news of the London morning papers in the Hearst office in New York and then fraudulently sent it out to American afternoon newspapers under the by-lines of imaginary names of non-existent “Hearst correspondents” in London, Paris, Venice, Rome, Berlin, etc. Another critic, Ferdinand Lundberg, extended the criticism in Imperial Hearst (1936), charging that Hearst papers accepted payments from abroad to slant the news. After the war, a further critic, George Seldes, repeated the charges in Facts and Fascism (1947).

Does this sound familiar today? Any similarities between the Hearst Newspaper Empire and Rupert Murdoch’s Media Empire are completely intentional.

So government was being influenced by those who controlled the media and those concerned about this influence and concerned that with the growing influence of the new growing media of Radio and later Television, broadcasted on the airwaves owned by the people and maintained by government, certain safeguards were put into place to avoid only one side of the story being told. They knew that the new mass media via airwaves would have a much greater impact than people reading newspapers. So we come to “The Fairness Doctrine.”

The Fairness Doctrine was a policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), introduced in 1949, that required the holders of broadcast licenses to both present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was, in the Commission’s view, honest, equitable and balanced. The FCC decided to eliminate the Doctrine in 1987, and in August 2011 the FCC formally removed the language that implemented the Doctrine.

The Fairness Doctrine had two basic elements: It required broadcasters to devote some of their airtime to discussing controversial matters of public interest, and to air contrasting views regarding those matters. Stations were given wide latitude as to how to provide contrasting views: It could be done through news segments, public affairs shows, or editorials. The doctrine did not require equal time for opposing views but required that contrasting viewpoints be presented.

The main agenda for the doctrine was to ensure that viewers were exposed to a diversity of viewpoints. In 1969 the United States Supreme Court upheld the FCC’s general right to enforce the Fairness Doctrine where channels were limited. But the courts did not rule that the FCC was obliged to do so. The courts reasoned that the scarcity of the broadcast spectrum, which limited the opportunity for access to the airwaves, created a need for the Doctrine. However, the proliferation of cable television, multiple channels within cable, public-access channels, and the Internet have eroded this argument, since there are plenty of places for ordinary individuals to make public comments on controversial issues at low or no cost.

The Fairness Doctrine should not be confused with the Equal Time rule. The Fairness Doctrine deals with discussion of controversial issues, while the Equal Time rule deals only with political candidates.

The Fairness Doctrine was put in place to meet the requirement of media companies using the public airwaves to “serve the public interest.” Over the years, the public interest standard has been slowly eroded away by broadcasters who do not take these obligations seriously and by policymakers who do not realize how deeply Americans care about these issues. Here’s a timeline I came across while researching for this rant that you may find of interest (let alone that I actually do research for these rants)

• In 1981, broadcasters abandoned their voluntary code of conduct, which had established programming and advertising standards through industry self-regulation.
• In 1981, The FCC created a “postcard renewal process,” throwing aside a more detailed review of whether broadcasters are meeting their obligations.
• In 1984, the FCC eliminated the ascertainment requirements whereby broadcasters had to reach out to the public, determine local community needs, address those needs through programming, and defend those choices in their license renewal process.
• In 1987, the FCC repealed provisions of the Fairness Doctrine, which required broadcasters to provide reasonable opportunities for contrasting and dissenting views on controversial topics.
• In 1996, Congress passed a telecommunications deregulation bill that allowed further consolidation in radio and television markets.
• In 2003, the FCC eliminated a wide range of media concentration protections, allowing a single company to own eight radio stations, three television stations, the only daily newspaper, the dominant cable TV provider, and the largest Internet Service Provider in a single community. It also effectively allows media conglomerates to control TV stations that serve up to 90% of all Americans.

This is stunning. Beginning with Reagan and the growth of Conservative views in governance of the airwaves and information media,( and with help from Democrats mind you) Corporations now have nearly full control on what is provided as fact to the American people so as to fit their narrative and control what government does. If Hearst was alive today, he would die in his orgasmic response to what has happened. Freedom of the Press has become freedom to control the people, what they hear, what they think and as a result, controls government.

The move to the conservative right in terms of governing, social morals, ethics, racial views all started under Reagan and has hit critical mass as we speak today. Most of it could be controlled if the American people were to get the full story again to make an educated and informed decision if we still had the “Fairness Doctrine” requiring media to show both sides of the issue. But today, they don’t.

I decided to do this rant based on the Meet the Press Romney Campaign Ad disguised and David Gregory interviewing Mitt Romney. Corporations control the traditional media and as a result, the messaging, the narrative getting out to the American people. They only want people to hear their side of issues, not the others because they know that if more information about the other side came out, they would no longer have the influence they do. What’s more, they are successfully working on the last refuge for the voice of the other side to get out to the people, the internet via social media tools like Twitter, Facebook, Blogs, etc. Once they go, there will only be one voice being heard. We will no longer have the informed, educated people the founders knew we needed in order to self govern. We will instead need to be led by those in the higher economic, or possibly social classes. Dare I say, a new monarchy. We lose the means of information, we lose democracy.

These are perilous times for The United States.

As a native Arizonan, or Zonie as some of us are called, I’ve tweeted and blogged about some unique Arizona issues. Jan Brewer, Joe Arpaio, Jan Brewer again, some more stuff on Joe Arpaio, you get the idea. What hasn’t been getting much play in the Main Stream Media (who continue to say Arizona is still solidly Red) is that Arizona Senator Jon Kyl retires from the Senate in January and his seat is open. You know who Jon Kyl is. He was the one who so confidently said in the Well of the Senate in April 2011 while debating funding for Planned Parenthood that “Well over 90% of Planned Parenthood funding goes towards abortions” and when confronted with the facts (something most GOP Representatives really hate) that it’s actually around 3% (see chart below). To which a spokesman for Jon Kyl said it “was not intended to be meant as a factual statement.” Well of course not, the only facts you can lay on Republicans these days is that nothing they say or do is factual. But I promise you, that’s another rant.

It wouldn’t be so bad if that one line was the only example of Jon Kyl’s disconnection from reality and the facts. Like most right-wing nut jobs Arizona elects to County, State and National Office, Kyl has been obsessed with the evils of immigration, the evils of any sort of compromise, the evils of negotiating with pharmaceutical companies for best price of drugs for Seniors on Medicare Part D, (that he left unfunded and allowed for the infamous Donut Hole for Seniors that is only now being eliminated thanks to ObamaCare) and most recently has said that President Obama should be impeached over his handling of immigration law. He’s upset that the Supreme Court ruled most of SB1070 as Unconstitutional and that as a result the Justice Department would suspend the 287(g) program that allowed I.C.E. to deputize local law enforcement to handle immigration matters, and that he would suspend deportation of “Dream Act” children who did not come to this country on their own and only know this country. He feels that a President who ignores certain aspects of a law should be impeached. However, he supports a Maricopa County Sheriff who only enforces laws against low-end, low-risk offenders while ignoring 40,000 plus felony warrants or investigation of sexual assaults against minority children. (My Arpaio slam for this post). It’s nice to know that Kyl fully supports Joe Arpaio as he did Ben Quayle who got his ass kicked in our primary here.

So in January, Jon Kyl, the man who slept through civics and law during law school at the University of Arizona will be gone. The money says that he will be replaced by Congressman Jeff Flake who just finished up a bloody primary battle with fellow conservative Will Cardon. Both were trying to out conservative each other while also claiming the other was too liberal. It was nasty and got almost no attention outside of Arizona. What also doesn’t get attention in nationally is that Jeff Flake does in fact has a Democratic challenger. His name is Richard Carmona. In my humble opinion, this man can easily take Kyl’s seat and help the Democrats not only keep the Senate, but expand their control. So who are these two candidates?

Flake was born in Snowflake, Arizona, the son of Nerita (née Hock) and Dean Maeser Flake. His birth town was named in part for his great-great-grandfather, Mormon pioneer William J. Flake. Flake was educated at Brigham Young University and was a Mormon missionary for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to South Africa in the early 1980s. He worked in the public affairs sector after college and served as Executive Director of the Foundation for Democracy in Namibia and Executive Director of the Goldwater Institute before entering the House of Representatives for Congressional District 6 in 2001. He lobbied against economic sanctions on South Africa’s apartheid regime in the 1980s.

He ran saying he would serve no more than three terms but changed his mind saying it was a mistake to term-limit himself and is currently serving his 6th term. In his favor, he doesn’t bring “pork barrel” projects back to his district. He’s always won because the Democrats never placed anyone in opposition to him. He only had one real battle against a Libertarian candidate. In Arizona, the Democratic Party tends to be stingy and weak-willed in placing viable candidates up against entrenched and wealthy Republican candidates. He is true to his “fiscal conservative” views being one of the few GOP House members to vote against spending bills submitted by the Republicans that added to the National Debt to include TARP. Actually, he sounds pretty good. However, he also opposes all tax increases and votes for additional tax cuts for the wealthy and does little to cut spending already in place. He holds true to Grover Norquist’s attempt to starve the federal government out of existence so the rich can be richer and everyone else can fend for themselves.

On immigration, Flake does go against the Party hardliners (to include Kyl) by supporting immigration reform to allow a path to citizenship and a watered down version of the Dream Act. However, in foreign policy, he supported going into Iraq, he just voted against paying for it. He voted against troop surges in Afghanistan. He’s for lifting the Cuban economic embargo and is for renewal of the Patriot Act.

He’s Pro-Life and though he voted to repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, he also wants a constitutional ban on Gay Marriage. He tends to be schizophrenic regarding privacy rights in our country.

So why would this make Jeff Flake weak? Well though he’s very much in bed with the mainstream right wind GOP Tea Party on key issues of No taxes, No spending, No abortions and No Gay marriage, he’s also for immigration reform, normalizing relations with Cuba, he’s for some Gay rights (just not marriage). As mentioned above, he does tend to get schizophrenic on Core Conservative views. This is why he was bloodied up in the primary against Will Cardon. Though Cardon is a moron in every sense of the word, he laid some good punches on Flake.

So now let’s examine Flake’s Democratic opponent, Richard Carmona.

http://www.carmonaforarizona.com/

Richard Carmona is the former Surgeon General under George W. Bush from 2002 through 2006.

Carmona was born in New York City and raised in Harlem.  After dropping out of High School at age 16, he enlisted in the U.S. Army in 1967. While enlisted, he received his GED and joined the Army Special Forces and became a combat-decorated Vietnam veteran, and began his career in medicine as a Special Forces medic. He was awarded the Purple Heart with one Oak Leaf Cluster, the Bronze Star, Presidential Unit Citation, as well as several meritorious duty award, commendations, citations and ribbons.

After leaving active duty, Carmona attended community college where he earned his associate of arts degree in nursing. In 1977, he graduated from the University of California, San Francisco, with a bachelor of science degree; in 1979, he received his medical degree from UCSF, where he was awarded the prestigious gold-headed cane as the top graduate. In 1998, he earned a Master’s degree in Public Health from the University of Arizona.

He worked for the Pima County Sheriff’s Office in Tucson since 1986. He eventually worked his way up to deputy sheriff. He served as medical director of the county’s police and fire departments. He was a peace officer leader of the SWAT division, with expertise in special operations and emergency preparedness, including weapons of mass destruction.

In 1999, he confronted a mentally ill person who was assaulting someone else at a car accident. After the person would not step out of his car, he shot at Carmona, grazing his head, and the Deputy Sheriff shot back seven times, killing him. The deceased was an ex-convict who had shot and killed his own father that day. In 2000, he was honored at the National Association of Police Organizations TOP COPS award ceremony.

On July 10, 2007, Carmona, along with former Surgeons General C. Everett Koop and David Satcher, testified before the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform about political and ideological interference with the Surgeon General’s mission. Carmona accused the Bush Administration of preventing him from speaking out on certain public health issues such as embryonic stem cell research, global climate change, emergency contraception, and abstinence-only sex education, where the Administration’s political stance conflicted with scientific and medical opinion.

Carmona also testified that the Bush Administration had attempted for years to “water down” his report on the dangers of secondhand smoke and pressured him not to testify in the tobacco industry’s racketeering trial: “Anything that doesn’t fit into the political appointees’ ideological, theological or political agenda is ignored, marginalized or simply buried.” According to Carmona, he was even ordered not to attend the Special Olympics because the event was sponsored by the Kennedy family, and was told to mention President Bush three times on every page of his speeches. The Washington Post subsequently identified William R. Steiger as the Bush Administration official who had blocked release of Carmona’s report on global health because it conflicted with the Administration’s political priorities.

Reuters reported that Carmona’s predecessors as Surgeon General had acknowledged the high level of political interference he experienced, saying: “We have never seen it as partisan, as malicious, as vindictive, as mean-spirited as it is today, and you clearly have worse than anyone’s had.”

Carmona has been endorsed by Veteran Groups, Fraternal Order of Police, AFL-CIO, and most recently by Joanne Goldwater, Barry Goldwater’s eldest daughter. Carmona has asked Flake to disavow outside money in this campaign in keeping with Jeff’s rhetoric, but to date, no response. Carmona and Flake in a recent poll were tied. Flake is at best a flakey conservative with the hardliner’s in Arizona due to the revelations of his stance on immigration. Carmona is a decorated war veteran, law-enforcement officer and former Federal Official under a Republican President. His resume is somewhat stronger than that of Flakes. The two have yet to debate, but the day is coming. Considering the growing dissatisfaction with the GOP by women and Hispanics across the country, but particularly in Arizona, Carmona stands a good chance of winning. Maybe after that, the Main Stream Media will pay us some attention for something other than nut jobs like Brewer, Arpaio, and Kyl.

Keep you fingers crossed and if you’re a Zonie like me, you know what you need to do.

Well we’ve had two weeks of political conventions and now that they are over, the talking heads on Main Stream Media are placing everything in perspective. When I say perspective, more times than not, the perspective of Main Stream Media corporate Ownership. But that’s another rant.

What have we learned about both Conventions?

Well from the RNC Convention we learned that the truth is in short supply from the people who came on stage, especially from the two candidates. Even FOX had issues with Paul Ryan’s diatribe that lacked anything resembling the truth. They lied about Medicare, they lied about Welfare, they lied about what the President said about any number of issues from his original campaign through his presidency.

They decided to make no mention on the war in Afghanistan let alone our soldiers and Marines who still serve in harm’s way or who have returned to the country needing jobs, medical and mental health care for themselves and their families. They neglected to talk about tax returns, vouchers for medicare.

The only thing they continued to talk about was repealing Obamacare. However, they said nothing about what it would be replaced with, or why it is better to allow insurance companies:

To set life-time limits on coverage.

Pull coverage for people who end up getting sick.

Denying coverage or increasing costs for pre-existing conditions including being a woman.

To set up corporate “death panels”.

To allow insurance companies to spend more than 20% of incoming premiums on things not related to healthcare like CEO bonuses and perks for their friends and staff.

To allow insurance companies to drop children from their parent’s plans after they are age 18.

Although they had spots for Hurricane relief from the Red Cross, they neglected to talk about their plans to cut even more funding to the states, thus firing first responders, and how they want to privatize FEMA.

So a lot of lies, a lot of missing information and a narrative that our country really has problems right now and it’s Obama’s fault. They mentioned that there are not enough jobs going around (while neglecting to mention that GOP Congress has blocked every job bill submitted) and that our country owes too much money (neglecting to mention that two-thirds of the national debt came from the Bush administration with help from GOP).

They want more tax cuts for the wealthy (while neglecting to mention that it means higher taxes for everyone else and still won’t do anything to pay down the debt).  And they want to stay in Afghanistan, possibly go back to Iraq, attack Iran, and threaten the real enemy Russia (?).

But they all have families that they love, as they love themselves (especially Chris Christie). It was humbling to hear how Romney had to sell stocks so they could entertain friends while living in a basement apartment (Mitt has this thing with basements).

So in a nut shell, the country really sucks, it’s all Obama’s fault and it has nothing to do with the House Republicans refusing to allow any economic relief bills be heard, let alone pass and sent to the Senate for consideration and the President’s signature because they are too busy outlawing abortion and contraceptives, oh and repealing and not replacing Obamacare.

Then came the DNC Convention. What did we learn there?

Well, after each speech heard on the floor, we heard from FOX that they “swung and miss” without really explaining why. We learned that the sounds of cheering and enthusiasm from the delegates (according to FOX) was because they were in a smaller venue than the RNC. Really? We learned that Michelle Obama didn’t have to do a speech to humanize her husband, because we already knew that, but it was an awesome speech none-the-less. We learned that the Democrats have no problems talking about war, the veterans and what is right about the country.

They focused on their accomplishments and how we are doing better than when the President took office. Were some facts skewed, embellished? Well to be honest, I’ve caught a few. I heard one talk about how insurance companies had to return premium money back to the customer if they paid more than 50% towards non medical related costs. It was actually 20%. So not so much a lie than a misstatement.

We learned that Obama never claimed he could change things, that if there was change, it had to come from us. Well, can’t argue with that but I suspect it was more bad messaging on his part than purposeful misleading.

Oh, and right out of “The American President” we learned that Barack Hussein Obama IS the president.

To compare the two conventions, as I tweeted last night, The RNC Convention belittled the Country, the DNC Convention Inspired the Country.

Oh, and I also learned that even though as Dr. Gregory House quite appropriately points out “Everybody Lies” just some people lie far more than others and they are usually Republicans.

Give a listen to Bill Clinton doing what Bill Clinton does best, explaining reality to Americans in clear terms that even GOP idiots can understand. This is why they dread the Big Dog.

I have nothing to add to Governor Patrick’s speech at the DNC yesterday. He had to clean up Mitt Romney’s mess the same way President Obama’s been trying to clean up George Bush’s and the GOP’s mess. Fortunately Deval hasn’t had the obstruction the President has had. I can find nothing wrong in this speech and he’s right, it’s time Democrats grow a backbone and stand up to the right and their racism, lies and self-defeating policies.

Enjoy

I live and work in what’s known as a “Right to Work” state, though Thom Hartmann more aptly calls it a “Right to Work for Less” state. As a result, I have never been a member of a Union. However, I recognize the importance of Unions and what they have provided all workers, Union and Non-Union alike. So let’s examine why many of us have today off work.

Labor Day is an American federal holiday observed on the first Monday in September that celebrates the economic and social contributions of workers. Oregon was the first state to make it a holiday in 1887. By the time it became a federal holiday in 1894, thirty states officially celebrated Labor Day. Following the deaths of a number of workers at the hands of the U.S. military and U.S. Marshals during the Pullman strike, the United States Congress unanimously voted to approve rush legislation that made Labor Day a national holiday; President Grover Cleveland signed it into law a mere six days after the end of the strike. The September date originally chosen by the (Central Labor Union) CLU of New York and observed by many of the nation’s trade unions for the past several years was selected rather than the more widespread International Workers’ Day because Cleveland was concerned that observance of the latter would be associated with the nascent Communist, Syndicalist and Anarchist movements that, though distinct from one another, had rallied to commemorate the Haymarket Affair (an earlier labor demonstration in Chicago that resulted in anarchists throwing dynamite at police sent to disperse the crowd and eventually resulted in May Day celebrations for workers) in International Workers’ Day. All U.S. states, the District of Columbia, and the territories have made it a statutory holiday.

Unions were and are the manifestation of workers’ rights. Let’s be honest, the most costly expense of any business operation is manpower. So logically the best way to increase the profit margin is to have slavery. However, if slavery is no longer available (Damn you Yankees!) then you find legal ways to pay the least amount with the least amount of benefits to those who must provide the most they can to take back little to subside on. Prior to (and post) the Union Movement, we had sweatshops, child labor, we had “company towns” where instead of getting paid in legal tender, you got company script to make all purchases at the company stores, unsafe and often deadly work environments. Those who merely spoke for the rights of other workers often ended up beaten and many times beaten to death. Business leaders benefited from exploiting their worker force and became extremely wealthy. Sadly, very little if any of that increased wealth ever trickled down to the workers that made it possible for them.

So as the country matured, and more and more Unions formed, workers’ rights gained an ear in Washington and State capitals. Over time, especially during the Progressive Movement and with the aid of Republican Teddy Roosevelt, laws were enacted to not only protect Unions and their workers, but all workers whether they belonged to Unions or not. The Union Movement gave us what we have today: Minimum Wage, Workplace Safety Rules, OSHA, Fair Labor Standards, Paid Sick, Vacation and Holidays, 40 hour work weeks, and the list goes on. As workers rights became codified into law, a movement began to swing the pendulum back to the direction of the corporate leaders. Workers are needed, but can be very expensive. In time, the “Right to Work” State movement came into being to nullify any positive impact of unions in the states that enacted them. Prevented public sector employees (Teachers, Police, Fire Fighters, etc) from having a stronger voice for their own kind.

And now with this recent election cycle, we are actually hearing from the Republicans, cries to repeal child labor laws, give more “rights” to business to exploit workers, reduce minimum wage standards. All things that would clearly increase the profit margins of companies and just as clearly would make the lives of workers far worse and despite the increased wealth of the corporate leaders, none of it will trickle down.

Union membership has been steadily declining, their influence waning and as a result, corporate profits for the few has been increasing. It’s no coincidence, it’s by design. Republicans and their Corporate sponsors are afraid of the workforce organizing for their own rights to get the best deal possible. Union stripping laws for public and private sector jobs (all written by ALEC) have been introduced and passed around the country by legislative action. Note that they never pass by popular vote. In fact when put to public votes, the workers come out ahead. Imagine that.

Henry Ford was a capitalist. He was also an asshole who admired what Fascists were doing in Europe. However he was also smart enough to know that if you pay your employees enough, they will come back and buy your product, thus increasing your profit margin. It’s a shame that many of these “brilliant business minds” don’t understand the concept that a cheap labor force, though good for short-term profit also destroys the middle-class work force and ultimately puts them out of business since no one has the money to buy what they produce. What’s the saying, penny wise-pound foolish.

Enjoy Labor Day today and even if you are not a member of a Union, be thankful to them for doing the hard work, even getting beaten up and killed for many of the rights you enjoy today as a worker. Support them because in doing so, you support yourself and the economic well-being of the nation as a whole, including the 1%. They’re just too greedy and pound foolish to recognize it.

This was when President Obama met with the GOP Conference in January 2010 after his State of the Union. The GOP were still in the minority and he took questions. Note how though partially respectful, they still refer to “Democrat Proposals” instead of “Democratic” and near the end he discusses with Paul Ryan his Medicare Voucher Proposal. Boehner thought this exercise would embarrassed the President instead Obama turned the tables on him and the conference. The president was focusing on working in a bipartisan manner while behind closed doors they were already working on not giving him any accomplishments going into 2010 and later 2012. This is an hour and a half video, but well worth viewing for perspective of today and what we face.

Jon Lovitz had a character he developed known as Tommy Flanagan. He was a member, no president of Pathological Liars Anonymous, yeah, that’s the ticket. He dated, no married Morgan Fairchild. Many of you know the routine. After the convention and most recently the radio comment from Paul Ryan about running his one and only marathon in less than three hours, this character came to mind.

So what is a Pathological Liar? There is a medical term involved here:

Pseudologia fantastica, mythomania, or pathological lying are three of several terms applied by psychiatrists to the behavior of habitual or compulsive lying. It was first described in the medical literature in 1891 by Anton Delbrueck. Although it is a controversial topic, pathological lying has been defined as “falsification entirely disproportionate to any discernible end in view, may be extensive and very complicated, and may manifest over a period of years or even a lifetime.

Lying is the act of both knowingly and intentionally/willfully making a false statement. Most people do so out of fear. Pathological lying is considered a mental illness, because it takes over rational judgement and progresses into the fantasy world and back.

The Romney/Ryan Campaign made it very clear this week during the convention that they would not be dissuaded by fact checkers in response to their (the fact checkers) analysis  of all the misrepresentations (otherwise known as lies) coming from their camp. The ads where they blatantly lie about President Obama’s position on Medicare and the $716,000,000,000.00,  as well as the lies  regarding Welfare and the work requirements. All have been clearly debunked, yet they continue to tell these lies. As Joseph Goebbels said, “tell a lie enough times, it becomes the truth.” And Hitler himself said, “Don’t bother with the small lies, tell the big ones.”

And before some of you get into a tizzy about comparing Romney/Ryan to Hitler/Goebbels and the Nazis; this is what they said about lying, the facts about what Romney/Ryan are doing with lies are undeniable. I’m not calling them Nazis, but they are using propaganda tactics similar to the Nazis. Prove me wrong.

So they lie, they lie a lot and they are starting to lie big. They dismiss those who fact check them. Ron Christie went so far last night on Bill Maher to ask, “who checks the fact checkers?” To which I respond by quoting John Adams “Facts are stubborn things.” For the most part, since they are non-partisan and depend on providing provable facts in their analysis, I go with the fact checkers. If they are presenting wrong facts and analyses, present the facts showing that what they presented was wrong Ron Christie. Facts are what is used in Courts of Law. They are presented, weighed and ruled upon by either a Judge and/or Jury. Facts are stubborn things, they are absolute when pulled and presented in an unbiased manner. Just because they show someone is “lying” doesn’t make them partisan. Denying the facts without presenting counter facts is partisan and lazy.

So they are liars, but are they “pathological”? I wasn’t prepared to go that far until the recent radio interview where Paul Ryan said he ran a marathon in less than three hours when he was 20. As someone who actually trained with professional marathon runners (it’s become a science people) and studied the mechanics and history involved in running, I knew he was bull-shitting. Not possible. It flies in the face of professional marathon runners, athletes and pure common sense. It was quickly debunked, yet Ryan himself has yet (as of this blog posting) apologized and admitted he was lying.

He has lied about his position on abortion, contraceptives and personhood responding to the flack regarding Akin, he has lied about what his budget would, and is capable of doing, he has lied about the record of President Obama, he has lied about when a plant in his own district of Janesville closed and who was responsible, all of these things are easily proven by facts that are available for all to read and assess. Paul Ryan knows the facts that counter his lies are out there, yet he continues to lie and won’t apologize or take any of it back. He is nearing the realm of Pathological. And Mitt Romney’s record of presenting falsehoods depending on which way the wind is blowing and who his audience or backers are? Well, he’s getting pretty close himself.

Building a political movement, let alone an administration on lies is like building a home on sand. The foundation is poor, unstable and will result in the whole structure falling in on itself. The Romney/Ryan Campaign have built their race for the White House on the weakest of sand dunes. We as a nation cannot afford to have the country collapse due to their poor work on not building on a solid foundation of actual facts.