Obama-Romney is the new Kennedy-Nixon

The American political headlights are fixed on the Presidential debates. October 3rd, 16th and 22nd mark the candidates’ final opportunities to influence the mercurial American electorate. Polls give neither candidate significant advantage. It makes sense to look to history as a barometer of the outcome. Only one election comes close to Obama-Romney in terms of precursors, divisions, and implications: 1960’s Kennedy-Nixon election.

Even with a 42-year time difference, the analogies between the elections are uncanny. Both come on the heels of economic downturns featuring long-fought wars as backdrops. The key similarity, though, is the clash of cultures that the candidates from both elections depict. Romney and Nixon are two older liberal-leaning Republicans with shakily wavering stances. Both considered awkward and disingenuous unless calculated, they draw support from a fervent, ideologically-rigid base. On the other hand, the younger Kennedy and Obama appeal to the progressive-minded and minorities, are gifted orators, air toward populism, and are the ‘rock stars’ of their respective campaigns.

Implication-wise, both elections are at historic social junctures in America. 1960 came at the precipice of counterculture becoming mainstream, while 2012 underscores a divisive tension between the rich and poor. 2012’s debates will undoubtedly be the fulcrum of the election. Americans will see Romney, like Nixon, in the wild, and Barack Obama, like Kennedy, taking on a fierce ideological adversary. If history holds true, Obama’s calm, Kennedy-like demeanor should outshine Romney’s shifty, deliberate Nixon-esque approach. Though the times, they continue a’changin’, 2012’s significance emulates that of 1960 effortlessly.

Dear Congress (re: SOPA & PIPA)

For the past two years, you Congress, our legislative body has been embroiled in a myriad of conflicts. From immigration, taxation, education, health care, Barack Obama's birth certificate, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Libya, bin Laden allllll the way down to Barry Bonds lying in court, you have ran the gamut of brutal contention. It seems like every issue on the table is a bitter dispute between the Democrats and Republicans. Are you going to play laissez faire or overregulate? Are you going to kick the can down the road, or simply handle your business now. Are you going to act on principle, logic, and virtue or act like politicians and reneg on your promises start your re-election bid the day after Election Day spend most of your time doing meaningless bidding? You've done nothing but the latter, Congress... Which is why your ever-so-consistent stance on the Internet-killing SOPA and PIPA bills is so confounding for me.

For all of the hoopla last year regarding the debt ceiling, Occupy Wall Street, class warfare and all of those ideologically-rooted political impasses, you would think that something so universal as the Internet wouldn't be privy to your spastic rulings, Congress. When did you all come to such a consensus? What happened to the deep-seeded resentments that keep you all on different ideological planets?

I think I know: lobbyists. If one looks at the supporters of SOPA and PIPA, it's a pretty high-profile list of offenders. The major networks, the RIAA, the MPAA and any organization associated with bringing owners (not producers) of content together, are all united in their big-wig support of SOPA and PIPA. That said, it's easy to see why. They're stuck in 2001, Congress!!! Remember that period when downloading music on Napster or Limewire or Bearshare was a Cardinal Sin? I do. I remember when the music companies shuffled their feet at getting into the online sector because they thought the craze wouldn't last. Fast forward 10 years, and it's happening again: media companies stuck in antiquated ways trying to quell the burning bastion of freedom that is the Internet. And you're aiding them, Congress.

You'd rather stifle than uplift. You'd rather be stringent about 'rules' than look at the meaning behind them, and their ramifications. You'd rather cut the cord than figure out how to make a better one. How lazy is that, Congress? Consider this. If you were to pass the two bills your Internet would:

- be 10x slower depending on what service you had and what sites you're visiting
- be dominated by Facebook, NBC, CBS, ABC, Facebook, FOX, Facebook, and Facebook
- have about tenfold LESS sites
- be unable to stream movies, videos, or music unless expressly consented to by the controlling media conglomerate

In short form, the Internet would be zapped back to 1995, Congress. A few big companies would run everything and the whole idea of 'free market economics' would be null. We might as well have AOL Version 1.0 floppy disks again. If you didn't have the money to fight a SOPA or PIPA claim, your site would be off the 'net before you even knew it!

Congress, by passing these bills, you are essentially giving yourselves free reign to dictate what shouldn't be dictated. You are killing Internet innovation at the root by making it a criminal offense to do anything that remotely infringes on any sort of intellectual property. No idea is original, Congress. Lest I get into the finer aspects of intellectual property, I would say that protecting someone's work is NOT wrong. For every word that I've written on this website to be lifted and purported as someone else's would be unforgivable. At the same time, you have no right to say where personal liberty ends and protecting against piracy begins, especially when you've balked at regulating things that matter, like say, big banks, the military-industrial complex, health insurance companies, or oil conglomerates?

It's as if you want the stop the conversation, Congress. That's not democracy. For all of the talk of corporate personhood and money in politics, this is a shining example. Why listen to the people, when you can line your pockets with money from companies who'd rather protect old ways than innovate new ones? That's what politics is about nowadays, isn't it? SOPA and PIPA are just pixels in the greater picture of your failures as of late. If this is too harsh, then good. Censor me. Stifle free speech and free movement of information, so the whole world can see what 'democracy' is all about. I guarantee you'll be doing more harm than any debt crisis, terrorist threat, or education bubble will.

Dear Occupy Wall Street

Ohhhhhh, so that's what it's about? Show that to every conservative and 1-percenter on the radar...

The Internet has a way of aggrandizing things so that you think a lot more of them than they really are. Sometimes you have to see something for yourself to get a good idea of what the point is. I could go on an on with euphemisms to segue into what I want to say here, but Occupy Wall Street, upon my 2nd visit to your site, it's a miracle I didn't see your mission at first.

The American political/economic/social malady has never been a secret to me. One look at half of the political posts on this blog, and a reader knows that there is something seriously wrong with the direction our country is going in. Occupy Wall Street, you are a result of that, not because you are doing your job to a tee, but because you are giving something to talk about. That's not a bad thing, but it has the potential to be turned against you, because of how overarching your goal is.

To draw attention to the vast inequality, rampant injustices and ridiculous faults of our system is your goal, OWS. Being down at Zucotti Park gave me that perspective, but Middle America won't see it the same way. Violence, anger, misdirected and misinformed protests and general hoopla (have always wanted to use that word in a sentence) are what will draw their attention, and not the actual issues at hand. For two weeks, your movement was seen as a fringe movement. Add some high-profile appearances like Kanye West, Talib Kweli, and Russell Simmonds, and you've got the press' ears. Add some heated standoffs and violent shows from police to your pot of brew, and NOW you've got the rest of the world watching. Why is that? Why are you relegated into the realm of 'noise' until something bad happens? Is that what America is really about? Is your plight just background noise, destined to be talked about for a few more weeks until they 'deal' with you?

Look at even the way politicians have reacted to you. The right wings say your a bunch of dirty hippies, underachieving liberal arts students and homeless gathered over nothing, even though the Tea Party makes WAY less sense. The left wing, even though they lay in the same bed of lobbyist and corporate money, has latched on to you, hoping they can ride a populist, working class wave all the way to victory in 2012. At this point, you're nothing more than a prop, OWS. While you may be formless, leaderless and all-encompassing, you're going to have to soon adopt a serious stance so that you can't be boxed in. It's even ironic that your lack of parameters has resulted in parameters placed around you by the media and politicians.

OWS, I started out in support of you, became disillusioned with my first visit, got back some zeal in the second and am somewhat wishy-washy about you now. It's not because I don't agree with your goals, or that I've given up hope that some sort of rational discussion about our country's system can come together. It's because your own nature makes you impossible to follow. Idealistic, Utopian or what have you, it has to end somewhere, and you don't even know where that is. Yes, protests have been popping up in other locales, but to what end? Don't sit there and tell me about the 'revolution'. I've listened to more Gil Scott-Heron than you know, and the revolution damn sure won't be televised, much less tweeted, Facebooked, Tumblr'ed. But how do we draw the line between sensationalism and actual constructive movement?

OWS, that is your struggle: to find legitimacy without the controversy that litters most politics, to bring attention to something that should have been attended to years ago. Our society is one that emphasizes the frivolous and fleeting for the important. It's like you couldn't have been a better movement for a worse time, OWS. The country needs the discourse you bring. Though I'm not convinced most Americans will be able to see through the noise to the actual problems that plague their nation, I think enough will pay attention to that something gets done... Maybe not a 'revolution', but something. I suppose the same lack of clarity in goals that you began with has to bear on the lack of clarity in an end. We all have to start somewhere...

Dear Congress (re: Debt Deal)

You didn't push the button... You made a deal to make a deal to push the button if you can't agree to push the button.

via The Huffington Post:

Congressional leaders and President Obama on Sunday night announced they've cut a deal to avert a historic U.S. default, saying they have assembled a framework that cuts some spending immediately and uses a "super Congress" to slash more in the future.

The deal calls for a first round of cuts that would total $917 billion over 10 years and allows the president to hike the debt cap -- now at $14.3 trillion -- by $900 billion, according to a presentation that House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) made to his members. Democrats reported those first cuts at a figure closer to $1 trillion. It was unclear Sunday night why those two estimates varied.

The federal government could begin to default on its obligations on Aug. 2 if the measure is not passed.

The next round of $1.5 trillion in cuts would be decided by a committee of 12 lawmakers evenly divided between the two parties and two chambers. This so-called super Congress would have to present its cuts by Thanksgiving, and the rest of Congress could not amend or filibuster the recommendations.

But if the super Congress somehow failed to enact savings, the measure requires automatic cuts worth at least $1.2 trillion. Those cuts would be split equally between military and domestic programs. Social Security, Medicaid and programs for the poor would be spared, but Medicare providers -- not beneficiaries -- would take a hit.

Compromise is a concept that everyone likes to espouse. It is so lauded and aggrandized in mainstream society, yet few people are truly willing to compromise. In this age of opinions, we like to say that everyone's opinion matters, yet when it comes time to move, most people are so stuck holding up their ideologies that they can't even begin to agree. Such is the case with you today, Congress.

Throughout the summer, and dating back to the 2010 midterm elections, the rising national debt has been a topic of hot debate. The hard (or imagined; no one really knows) date of August 2nd was engraved in our country's mind as the day when the United States would no longer have cash to sustain its spending. Congress, you were entrusted with finding a solution that would not only stop the bleeding from our credit cards, but also to bring in some additional cash so that maybe we wouldn't have to resort to rampant borrowing to make ends meet. I won't go into the specifics of whether I supported cuts or new revenues (you can look back at my other letters for that). The debt deal is already done, so having a written standoff about the ideological standpoints is futile. What I will take a stab at, though, is that the deal is little more that a deal to make another deal.

Congress, your job is simple: enact laws and legislation that reflect the views of the American people, and the realities of an eminent future. The months leading up until tomorrow have been a political three-ring circus, to say the least. Your simple duties have been absconded in a haze of filibusters, name-calling, misguided lone-rangering, misinformation and inactivity. From the Tea Party and GOP's unwavering insistence that everything with a pulse be cut, to Obama's 'holier-than-thou' approach, to the Dems disappearance, it seemed like no one on Capitol Hill really had the cojones to do what was right in the shadow of an impending financial collapse. Since none of the key players or sides in the debate were willing to concede, and our President forgot that he is the Executive of our fair country, we ended up with a deal that does nothing other than postpone our D-Day until Christmas. I can just feel the holiday cheer already.

Yes there are cuts, but they're mostly discretionary, and to things that already had one foot out of the door. Medicare and Medicaid, while pet programs of the Dems and sworn enemies of the GOP, are essentially going to be outmoded by Obamacare. Defense, with the Iraq and Afganistan wars simmering, was already a target. No new taxes or elimination of tax loopholes. No creative solutions to spur the economy. No infrastructure or educational plans to get the wheels rolling. Just... a deal to make a deal, and another 'bipartisan committee' to place the onus on balancing our books on. That's just not efficient, Congress. While I am liberal to the core, I understand what conservatives mean by there being too much 'government' when I think about a 'trigger' for more cuts or the new committee.

Congress, your task was to compromise so that we as a country don't have to think about defaulting on our national debts in another year's time. Instead, you effectively put off the hard decisions for no reason. We aren't any closer to a balanced budget than we were a year ago, because there is so much posturing, so many 'my way or the highway' leaders, and too many opinions (some corporate-funded, some just asylum-insane) for there to be any real consensus. If you think for a minute that this deal accomplished something more than attempting to placating the media and the few political extremist hell-bent on their own ideologies, you're dead wrong. This debt deal, and the negotiations that brought it along, proved that you are running about as efficient as a Ford Pinto with rear-end damage right about now, with no plans to put the fire out anytime soon.

You, Congress are in session for less than half of the year, usually taking summers off. That none of this became urgent until mid-July showed how truly disorganized you are. A compromise was your only task, and you couldn't even get a real one. Just a nice story for the papers, and another six months of uneasiness and anxiety for the American people to have to cope with. We elected you to make decisions for the country, not argue about who really cares about the country. Rather than be talking heads, why not be thinking ones? Thinking heads who look at the facts above all else and put strict party lines on the back burner to get the job done. Thinking heads who take the lessons of the past into consideration to make for a successful future. Thinking heads who have innovative plans while continuing to listen to the constituents that put them in office. Democrat or Republican, Independent, Moderate, Progressive or Tea Partier, liberal or conservative, you have to share the brunt of these decisions. Compromise doesn't mean anything if the status quo continues to be protected. Perhaps it's time you began compromising like there's more at stake than re-election...

Dear President Obama

Sometimes, you've got to walk away from the table to let them know you're serious.

via CNN:

A fourth straight day of talks intended to head off a possible government default ended on a tense note Wednesday, with House Majority Leader Eric Cantor saying President Barack Obama cut him off by saying "I'll see you tomorrow" before walking out.

The exchange concluded almost two hours of talks that failed to achieve a breakthrough. Another session -- the fifth in five days -- was set for Thursday, participants said...

Cantor, R-Virginia, told reporters after Wednesday's meeting that he proposed a short-term agreement to raise the federal debt ceiling, a position Obama has previously rejected.

"That's when he got very agitated and said I've sat here long enough -- that no other president -- Ronald Reagan -- would sit here like this -- and that he's reached the point that something's gotta give," Cantor said, adding that Obama called for Republicans to compromise on either their insistence that a debt-ceiling hike must be matched dollar-for-dollar by spending cuts or on their opposition to any kind of tax increase.

"And he said to me, 'Eric, don't call my bluff.' He said 'I'm going to the American people with this,' " Cantor quoted Obama as saying.

"I was somewhat taken aback," Cantor said. When he continued to press the issue, Cantor said, Obama "shoved back from the table, said 'I'll see you tomorrow' and walked out."

There comes a point when compromise is no longer an option; when putting your cards on the table in a motion of humility is best replaced by flipping the table over and throwing chairs... Well, perhaps that wouldn't work in the White House. But the furniture is all the same. President Obama, for the past two months, the country (or the more informed/interested parties of the country) and it's government have been embroiled in a vicious economic, philosophical and sociological debate about the deficit. I won't sit here and go through all of the ins and outs, because I'm sure you've had enough of it, and by your reaction yesterday it's obvious the debate has hit an impasse.

GOP Leaders like John Boehner, Rick Perry and Eric Cantor have stuck to their guns, claiming that raising taxes on the rich would hurt the 'job creators' and that cutting social programs and taxes are the quickest way to cut the deficit. Barack, I am proud to know that you finally called their bluff and walked out of the futile negotiations. I'm tired of Republicans protecting the corporate big wigs whose pockets they're holding. I'm tired of them wanting to cut social programs that most Americans rely on, all while refusing to cut military spending that has blown way out of proportion since the Iraq/Afganistan Wars started. I'm tired of a Congress so hell bent on not raising taxes on the rich that they would allow the country to go into a default in August. I'm tired of reading the news and seeing these same Republicans claiming that they will not budge when you're clearly trying to come to a centrist, middle-of-the-road compromise that encompasses some of their social cuts and the new tax revenues you're seeking.

You finally put your foot down and decided that sitting at a table with a bunch of GOP blowholes who keep spinning the same record about tax cuts and social program cuts was about as useful as a pee-flavored lollipop. You even brought up the GOP Messiah, Ronald Reagan, claiming that not even he would subserve to such draconian measures. It's been proven, by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Federal Reserve, numerous polls and independent researchers that cutting taxes (especially to the rich) will NOT FIX THE DEFICIT. And you know, just like I and most non-FOX News watching citizens, that those same tax cuts were the impetus for this Great Recession that's threatening to collapse our economy once again. The Republicans would rather drive us into the ground to protect an outmoded and unsustainable ideology, than come to a compromise that, quite frankly, employs a lot more of their ideas than yours.

Obama, you said that a change was necessary in 2008. For the past year, I've felt that you've kowtowed too much to the devices of the Party of No. Yesterday, I think that the Obama that I voted for was reincarnated with a vengeance, and I LOVE IT. By walking out of the negotiations yesterday, you proved that you're not going to give up the high ground. Yes, the GOP has a majority in the House. Yes, their personal media conglomerate FOX News, continues to purport lies and falsehoods to the same people that are being downtrodden by this recession. And yes, John Boehner and Eric Cantor are about as fiscally sound as Donald Trump in a store full of toupees. But you're the President. You're the person in command. You set the stage, and yesterday you took the stage right from under the those GOP blowholes by walking out. If this fire is an indicator of what's to come, then maybe I'm not as worried about what 2012 will bring (fiscally, that is) anymore. Walk hard, Barry. Walk hard...

Dear Lupe Fiasco

If there's one thing that bothers me about 'conscious MCs' (the terms sucks, but that's another post), it's that they feel comfortable discussing politics on a large forum, regardless of how wacked out their opinions are. Just because you are an MC that follows politics, does not mean that you have an open invitation to be on a soapbox 24/7. Lupe, I've had it up to here *raises hand above head* with you and your constant diatribes regarding politics, President Obama, or what have you.

First of all, Lu, why don't you vote? Are you out of your mind? You sit there and say that if a politician doesn't represent your agenda then you can't endorse him... WHAT? That's like saying that if a football team doesn't call the play you're screaming from your couch, then you'll cease to become a fan. NEWSFLASH: Politicians aren't your puppets, nor can you dictate the direction that their allegiances lie. You'd be better off trying to teach a doorknob how to bark. That you decry the merits of voting simply because no candidate has dropped a hand-written letter to Wasalu Muhammad Jaco, asking for your endorsement is sickening. Yes, the American political system is fatally flawed. Yes, we have a whole fistful of assholes in places of power. Yet the way to change this system isn't to sit on your ass and talk about why candidates don't suit your needs. The solution is to VOTE! Get up off your ass, vote for your Congressmen, Representatives, Mayors, Attorney Generals, Senators or whoever, so we can get good people in office, instead of talking out of your ass.



Second of all, where do you get off calling Obama a terrorist? You can sugarcoat it all you want, but you said the words. Stand by them. Like I said above, no politician is there to serve your exact needs. If they did, they'd only have one voter: YOU. Either way, calling Obama a terrorist because of some supposed link to war-mongering is not only ignorant, but extremely short-sighted. Do I agree with everything that Barack Hussein Obama has done in his almost 3 years in office? Absolutely not. Yet, not everything is of his decree. As much as I'd love for Barack to end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, it's not like he can pull an 'I Dream of Jeanie', wiggle his nose, and suddenly have every US troop, envoy and diplomat back in the country. As much as I hate the amount of money dedicated to the military, I'm not sure Barack is going to stand in front of a tank and do his best Tiananmen Square impression. These things take time and diplomacy, something that Barack is a lot better than you at. Give the man a break. He's got the GOP putting up a steel-reinforced brick wall in front of all his initiatives, a crumbling economy and infrastructure, and little to no help from his own party. You'd think that being such a polarizing figure yourself, you'd have a little empathy for Barack. Maybe it's all of that hair pulling the nutrients from your brain...

Thirdly, there's a distinct difference between a fact and an opinion, Lupe. It's obvious that you've got the lines blurred to monumental levels. Where have you come up with some of these theories? The last time I checked, every one of your claims is completely unfounded. Did Wikileaks come out of nowhere with a new round of leaks that they only sent out to you? Or has Barack been having secret meetings with you on the weekends discussing foreign and domestic policy? Somehow I think neither of those happened, so where are you getting your intel from? If FOX News is one end of the spectrum, then I'm pretty sure that your recent comments are at the other end of the Loony-o-meter.

Finally, Lupe, I'm tired of you yammering your mouth. From about early 2010, you've been on this 'holier than thou' escapade where you fling mud at everyone who doesn't agree with you. You sound childish. Being one of my favorite rappers, it was an arduous task trying to defend your words, but it's gotten to be too much. It's almost like you're trying to make people dislike you. LASERS might've sold a million and counting, but you're losing supporters at just as fast a pace. As much as you've made good music with intricate social commentary, that doesn't give you a free pass to become a political pundit. No, I'm not sitting here trying to quell your desire for political change, Lupe. In fact, in terms of overall zeal, you're probably one of the few MCs who has the cojones to say what's on his mind. I'm just imploring, begging, pleading with you. Please get your facts and head on straight, man. It's like watching Jack Nicholson being brought into the lobotomy room in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest; sad, yet you couldn't help but predict it. Do me a favor, Lupe. Make some good music so defending your outlandish political views doesn't become a case of cognitive dissonance.

Dear John Boehner

via The New York Times:

Speaker John A. Boehner said Monday that Republicans would insist on trillions of dollars in federal spending cuts in exchange for their support of an increase in the federal debt limit sought by the Obama administration to prevent a government default later this year. In his most specific statement to date on what Republicans will demand in the debt ceiling fight, Mr. Boehner told the Economic Club of New York that the level of spending reductions should exceed the amount of the increase in borrowing power.

“Without significant spending cuts and changes to the way we spend the American people’s money, there will be no debt limit increase,” Mr. Boehner told members of New York’s business and finance community. “And cuts should be greater than the accompanying increase in debt authority the president is given.” Mr. Boehner said those cuts should be in the trillions of dollars, not billions. In the speech, delivered ahead of a second round of debt limit negotiations with the White House and Senate Democrats on Tuesday, Mr. Boehner did not provide a timeframe for when the spending reductions would have to be imposed.

His address came after a leading Senate Democrat, Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, accused Mr. Boehner of “playing with fire” by holding the debt limit increase hostage to a push for spending cuts and budget restrictions.

“The idea of refusing to raise the debt ceiling should be taken off the table,” Mr. Schumer said in a conference call with reporters before the speech. Mr. Schumer also said he believed that the debt limit increase should be approved by mid-July to reassure nervous credit markets, though the administration has said it can push the deadline into early August.

In his remarks, the speaker expressed strong resistance to the effort by some Senate Democrats and President Obama for an alternative to enacting specific spending cuts as the price for increasing the debt limit: “triggers” that prompt automatic spending reductions and perhaps tax increases if Congress and the White House do not meet targets for lowering the deficit in coming years. That idea has emerged as providing the potential for compromise over the debt increase.

Mr. Boehner said the reductions should be “actual cuts and program reforms, not broad deficit or debt targets that punt the tough questions to the future. And with the exception of tax hikes — which will destroy jobs — everything is on the table.”

These days, government is less about truth, and more about who can spread the most believable lies. That goes for both parties. I try not to put too much faith in the political system at this point, unless I'm voting or seeing where the system is doing its job. That said, in the past year, the tax / spending / debt battle has been one of the most dishonest debates in American history, mostly due to your ignorant postulation, Mr. Boehner.

Leave alone the fact that you're one of those damn, dirty Republicans, whose sole purpose in life for the past 2 years has been to derail anything set forth by Congressional Democrats or President Obama. Forget the fact that your party came into this new century with a national surplus and a Republican president, only to leave with a $15 trillion (and counting) debt. Forget even the fact that your party continually espouses itself as a fighter for the middle class, when through your preferential treatment time and again shows your love for your rich corporate butt-buddies. Just consider this one, solitary truth about the United States budget: our taxes as a nation are at the lowest rate since the 1950s.

And you know it too, Boehner. That's why you continue to push spending cuts to programs that hold together our nation without any promise of compromise. That's why every time the Democrats do grow a pair and push their own spending cuts, you push back with even more grandiose ones. Boehner, for once, can we just look at the raw numbers (the ones your party contracted with outside think-tanks, mind you) and have the TRUTH? I'm tired of seeing mudslinging on both sides. It's not getting our country anywhere, and with every day that passes, the threat of a financial meltdown grows closer. The debt ceiling won't matter if, by the time we fix the ceiling, the cracks have already let a torrential downpour in.

Stop switching the subject to lowering oil prices when you and your party have been caught in bed handing out subsidies and tax breaks to big oil companies. Stop using thinly-veiled religious ideology as reasoning for cuts to Planned Parenthood when, we all know that program is little more than a blip on the national budget. Stop skirting around the issue of military spending, when it's clear that we dole out more for our armed forces than most countries have in the bank! Why are we even considering cuts and drops in education and infrastructure spending? Are you, for such a learned and accomplished public servant, that jaded into believing that trickle-down economics, and not investing in things that will spur innovation and JOBS, actually works? Reagan tried it, both Bush's tried it, and look what happened? DEBT.

John, it's not that I despise you... Well, you're making it hard not to. It's just that you continue to only see one side of the argument that clearly won't work. If we continue to cut things from our government, there will be nothing left to cut. And there certainly won't be much left to tax for anyway, considering our taxes are so low already. Holding the economy hostage like this is a sad reminder of you and your party's short-sighted policies. I shudder to think of where we will end up if you get your way: a desolate, top-heavy, disconnected, disenfranchised, internationally-hated nation with little to us than a name that once held weight. What good is 'balancing the budget' if no one but you, your party and those in your pockets can thrive? This is America, remember? And in America, I seem to remember that A) the truth should always prevail, and B) everyone should have a chance. Your party is ensuring neither is happening...

The Mailing List: 5 Reasons Why the US Might Be Screwed

Call me a pessimist. Call me an angry liberal. Call me unpatriotic. Call me any derogatory term for a person upset with the direction our country is going in, but you can never call me uninformed. Our fair country, the United States of America, is knee-deep in a metaphorical pile of excrement, body parts, oil and missiles, and lately I've felt less and less optimistic about our state.

 
Sidenote: If there are any Feds reading this, please don't take this as anything more than an opinion. I'm just a blogger, not a terrorist...

1. We are engaged in three wars.

Between Afghanistan, Iraq, and now our newfound military front in Libya, the United States is spreading itself thin in terms of our armed forces. After 10 years and over $1 trillion spent on military costs, the 'War on Terror' has yielded next to nothing in answers for the 9/11 attacks, much less broken up any part of the new 'axis of evil' George Dubya duped the world into believing in. Imagine that. We've been at war for over a decade now, and still have nothing to show for it but dead soldiers and civilians, a U.S. funded puppet state in Afghanistan that's rife with corruption, and a loss of faith from the world community. Now that we've engaged Libya, and still have no plans to get out of Afghanistan or Iraq, I can only imagine the carnage that can ensue. Not to mention, the U.S. is on a fast track to conflict with North Korea. If we think the Middle East has some WMD's, then I'd hate to see what Kim Jong-Il has up his sleeve. Simply put, we've focused too much on the military over the last decade, especially economically, bringing me to the next point:

2. Our domestic economic policies aren't helping.

If there is any person whose opinion on finance and the economy I'm going to trust, it's got to be Warren Buffet. The man simply knows money. And guess what? Warren Buffet says the recession isn't over, and won't be for some time considering the steps our government is taking. Take a look around. Unemployment is still rampant and job creation is stalling. The amount of Americans filing for bankruptcy is still rising. Our national debt is still rising, while our GDP is stagnant. And the worst part? Our government is enacting policies that will probably add to our deficit.

If it's not the richest Americans getting tax cuts widening the gap between the haves and have-nots and turning the U.S. into a nation of classes, then it's our egregious military spending putting us in the hole and bringing us closer to nuclear holocaust. If it's not CEO's bonuses jumping 30%, then it's state governments attempting to block unions while not cutting their own pay. If it's not a RoboCop statue being erected in the economic wasteland of Detroit, then it's the government dragging its feet in a budget-saving health care plan. Our government blasts the country's spending habits when it spends its money on ridiculous things that don't serve to improve our nation, and instead set us back.

3. Dependence on oil is still the precedent.

Energy is what runs everything. Repeat that. ENERGY RUNS EVERYTHING. It runs our transportation, every appliance and piece of technology we use, and every resource we need, needs artificial energy to work. That said, our dependence on oil is sickening. Of all Western nations, we use the most oil while producing the least. Additionally, the world's oil reserves are set to be running low in the next 30-40 years, with the world reaching it's peak oil production in the past few years. That means the world, and more importantly the U.S., is going to have to find a new method of energy production. Ironically, we continue peddling money into oil subsidies and oil companies, rather than invest in sustainable energy. At this rate, we'll be in the dark faster than you can flip a light switch.

4. Our education system and infrastructure are failing.

If you're reading this, I'm going to assume that you're reasonably educated and can formulate a complete thought on paper without awakening the spirit of Mr. Ed. However, for a lot of American youth, that's not the case. Since 2000, the United States has fallen behind most of the industrialized world in reading and math, two subjects that we excelled at starting in the 70s. Additionally, we're at our lowest rate of college matriculation and graduation in over 30 years (you could blame the recession). No, I'm not saying the U.S> has become a nation of idiots, but we're getting closer to that title by the day. With even the SAT beginning to show signs of lower scores, it's obvious that something isn't going right in our schools as of late, which should seriously affect the country's future, and inevitably our ability to understand what's even going on in our country...

5. Political engagement is down, while political ignorance is up.

According to Newsweek, Americans are becoming more and more politically ignorant, with more than 30% of Americans being unable to name our own Vice President, 44% unable to define the Bill of Rights, and 73% unable to identify why the Cold War was fought and 6% unable to circle our own Independence Day on a calendar. Excuse me? In this nation so hell-bent on patriotism and national pride, people have no earthly clue what's going on! No wonder they vote for legislation that hurts them financially, allow warmongering politicians to draw us into foreign conflict and listen to idiots like Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin spew misinformation. In the 60s, 70s and 80s our industrial might was enough to keep us afloat, because the rest of the world was simply playing catch-up. Now that the Internet has ushered in the information age, it's a necessity for the U.S. to know not only what's going on in our own country, but also the rest of the world... And we're failing terribly.

I won't sit here and say that I've lost all hope in our fair country. However, it's disconcerting to see so many ills in our country that are easily fixable with some smart leadership and engagement from our citizens. At the same time, with the way things are looking, a move to Canada might be just what the doctor ordered. They don't look like they're doing too badly. The U.N. seemed to think so, and I trust their judgment a lot more than the U.S.'s at this point...

Tax Breaks for the Rich vs. Budget Cuts for the Poor

More infographics. One more time, but really for your mind. If you haven't been paying attention for the past 6 months or so, the United States is at a crossroads of economic discourse. The haves and have-nots have always been disparate, but with the extension of George Bush's tax cuts, the distance between the two is set to grow exponentially. Conservatives, most notably the Tea Party, have put forth rhetoric saying that tax cuts for the rich will boost the economy by encouraging trickle-down economies. Basically, they're implying that by supplying the rich with more disposable and untaxable income, the rich will re-invest that money back into businesses and it will ultimately trickle down to the poor.

Yet as we've seen over the past decade, whether it's the financial collapse of 2008, the increasing tension between labor unions and owners, or our country's still-laconic economy, the rich have no intention of putting money back into the economy. They're content to put their money away in interest-bearing accounts and offshore entities to keep it 'safe'. What conservative political pundits fail to mention, though, is the crippling effect it has on the rest of us, further shrinking the middle class and widening the gap between the rich and poor. And all of this is lieu of the now GOP-led Congress threatening to cut numerous programs that would help the 'lower' class of the country. The infographic above compares the two: the tax cuts for the rich, and the cuts to programs such as early childhood education, teacher training and after-school programs, and job training for the unemployed. The good people over at the Center for American Progress put it together in the hopes that it would enlighten those blinded by conservative bullshit rhetoric. See what all the hub-ub is about above, and remember to VOTE so we don't have a government hell-bent on propping up the same elite class that propagated our financial collapse...

Crisis in Egypt

Source:http://www.onlineclasses.net
Click on the graphic to

What's this? Another infographic? Yes indeed, friends. More infographics than you can shake a leg at today. Excuse the ridiculous size of this one (HTML and I are sworn enemies today), but pay close attention to what it's dealing with. The political crisis in Egypt has taken the world by storm by juxtaposing the political and economic ideologies of the West with the religious cultural shift going on in Middle Eastern countries as of late. The above infographic is not only a timeline of the conflict in Egypt, but also an analysis of Mubarak's tenure as the President of Egypt. While this graphic cannot display every minute detail of the crisis, it's helpful to get a generalized view of the situation. Lord knows this is the most objective information that most Americans will ever get on the situation...

The Political Reach of Sarah Palin

Source: Online Colleges

One of the best things to come out of this 'social media era' is the rise of celebrities born of this era. One such 'celebrity' (clearly I'm using the term loosely) is the probable Republican candidate for the 2012 Presidential Election, Sarah Palin. Now, we won't get into how much I loathe that woman, or hope she would fall into an Alaska-sized ravine of broken glass and AIDS needles. That would be profane and distasteful. Instead, we're going to take an objective look at the political reach of Ms. Palin, how she's gotten that reach, and who is included in that reach. The above infographic gives a history of Palin's life, who she's endorsed politically, and even her most used words. I can admit, I didn't even know some of these things about her. If you need some fodder for your budding Sarah Palin hatred complex, look no further...

Dear WikiLeaks

via TechCrunch:

A lot of people, including many governments, have problems with WikiLeaks, the site dedicated to publishing sensitive and often classified documents. (Read more background on the controversial organization). The site is currently under a distributed denial of service attack, according to a Tweet from the WikiLeaks account. The site seems to be withstanding the attack so far. It is up right now.

The DDOS attack comes just as WikiLeaks is preparing to release another set of U.S. government documents—this time diplomatic cables which may prove so embarrassing that the State Department decided to warn foreign governments ahead of their release.

'People shouldn't fear their government; the government should fear their people'

That was the crowning quote from the institutional thriller V for Vendetta, in which a civilian uprising started by the release of supposed classified government information. In the real world, however, there is a lack of fervor for calling BS on the things that the government doesn't want to tell us. That was until you came about WikiLeaks. From the moment you came out with a set of government documents detailing the failures of the Iraq and Afghanistan military offenses, it's been an uphill battle to keep you afloat. I say that not because you're losing the battle. As a matter of fact, by releasing these documents and allowing the media, and more importantly the people, to see what the government really is up to, you're making good on the idea that the government should be transparent as possible.

I say you're fighting an uphill battle because there is such a thin line between releasing useful information and information that might be detrimental to our safety. In this day and age, homeland security is ironically synonymous with secrecy, even while terrorism continues to run rampant. We're in an age of constant security checks and less privacy at the expense of that security. WikiLeaks, I'm not going to lie. As enticing as the idea of knowing exactly what the government is up to is, that information in the wrong hands is a terrorist attack waiting to happen. As much as the 'embarrassing information' might be juicy and give liberal folks like myself fodder to trash the government, your leaks are a threat. Yes, the government should come clean with the people, but some things just shouldn't be public knowledge. WikiLeaks, I appreciate your truth seeking, as well as the fact that you keep the leakers anonymous. God help those leakers if they ever get outed. I see a lifetime of waterboarding and Guantanamo Bay-style torture in that case.

Moving along, WikiLeaks, your site doesn't deserve to be shut down or blocked. There is always going to be such a thing as freedom of speech, and that right should always be respected. The government has no right to intervene in your operations no matter how much they think you will have (or already have) sullied its name. That said, it's up to you guys to show some discretion. If you're handing out complete blueprints to the White House, maybe that's not the best thing. But logs of war and conferences determining our fate abroad are fair game, in my opinion. The government can't be mad at that. If they really were concerned about the effects of some of your leaks, they wouldn't do the classifying in the first place. I guess it all goes back to whom should fear who. If you're putting the country in a compromised position, the government should fear you. If the government is going to slam the books on you, then vice versa. Just make sure your sources are reliable and won't be too upset if the entire military descends on their house in a terrorism sting...

Dear Warren Buffett

I BANGS with this white man...

via ABC News:

In an exclusive interview on "This Week," Warren Buffett, Chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, told Christiane Amanpour that the rich should be paying more taxes and that the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy should be left to expire at the end of December.

"If anything, taxes for the lower and middle class and maybe even the upper middle class should even probably be cut further," Buffett said. "But I think that people at the high end -- people like myself -- should be paying a lot more in taxes. We have it better than we've ever had it."

The full Buffett interview will air on a special Thanksgiving edition of "This Week" focused on The Giving Pledge, a major philanthropic effort spearheaded by Buffet, and Bill and Melinda Gates. The billionaire brushed aside Republican arguments that letting tax cuts expire for the wealthy would hurt economic growth.

"They say you have to keep those tax cuts, even on the very wealthy, because that is what energizes business and capitalism," anchor Amanpour said.

"The rich are always going to say that, you know, just give us more money and we'll go out and spend more and then it will all trickle down to the rest of you. But that has not worked the last 10 years, and I hope the American public is catching on," Buffett explained.

It's ironic that sometimes the most well-off people in the world can be the most well-intentioned and well-read. When we think of wealth, we have a tendency to couple it with ignorance and selfishness, regardless of whether the person displays those traits outwardly. Wealth usually is coupled with those things as a subconscious way to keep that wealth, rather than say, donate it to those less fortunate. Such is the story of your case, Mr. Buffett. For the past decade the 'World's Richest Person' contest has been a two person race between you and Bill Gates, with your wallet weighing in a little heavier over the past few years. That said, you aren't like most billionaires, whose concerns only detail how they're getting their next buck, and who they have to run over to get it.

In a harrowing show of grace, you, Bill Gates and a number of other of the nation's wealthiest have pledged to give away a tremendous amount of your money to charity, which is commendable. Yet, that isn't even your most gracious act. With your platform and fame, you've spoken out against our 'bi-partisan' government and the GOP's plan to preserve the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy, a group you're a part of. Not only does your stand make all the sense in the world, it's probably the most honest assertion that a rich man has made in the past decade.

Warren, you're the richest man in the world. By default, you have to know a thing or two about money, how it's made, how its spent and where it's going. We'd have to be pretty stupid not to heed whatever warning you give about the nation's finances. That you essentially endorsed Obama's agenda to end those tax cuts is indicative of your financial prowess. To the contrary, only a truly dumb financial mind could endorse the tax cuts and be certain that they are the best route for the country. The tax cuts enabled the rich to get richer while the rest of the country languished in unemployment and lack of cash. Even better is the fact that you said the rich have 'had it better than ever'. Forget hearing it from the horse's mouth! You are the horse!

Warren, I think the best part about you speaking out is that you are in such a high and powerful position. For every bullsh*tting Republican and Tea Partier spitting out that malarkey (a favorite word of mine) about tax cuts for the rich helping the economy, you can be there to tell them different, AS a rich person. I wish more of the nation's wealthy were as honest about political economy as you were. Not only would the country not be in an almost insurmountable debt, we probably wouldn't even have to deal with a Tea Party or Sarah Palin or any of this balderdash we call 'bipartisanship' today. Oh, to dream...

P.S.: Yes, I know that if things happened your way, that you'd still have a substantial amount of money in your pocket. I think if the government stopped accepting money, you'd still have money. The point is that you're not so blinded by cash that you can't take an objective stance on the nation's financial health. That has to be worth more than a bullsh*t pledge by the GOP...

Dear Non-Voters

Exercise your rights, people...

This is America... The land of the free and the home of the brave. I'll repeat that. The land of the FREE. No, that doesn't mean that we can engage in every and all types of hedonistic behavior or do as we please simply because it suits us. It means that as Americans, we have certain freedoms, or unalienable (look it up) rights that we are privy to, given our legal status (career criminals, you can stop reading here). One such right is that of voting. The American political system is built on a tenet of democracy. Loosely defined, a democracy is a form of government that derives its powers from the people, either directly or indirectly. Ours is an indirect democracy, in which we elect officials to positions in which they can adequately represent our views and desires on a wide scale. As a nation, every year we get a new chance to put people in office on Election Day, the Tuesday after the first Monday in November.

Now, to the point at hand. Every year, around late September, political parties and campaigners bombard us with commercials, fliers and other garb for the purposes of us, the voters, placing their names or their causes on our ballots. And every year, we hear pundits tell us to vote. In 2008, the world watched as our nation elected Barack Obama, with a record turnout of voters and political activism. Now, all I ask is, where did all of that fervor go? Around the water coolers you hear people being a little shaky as to whether they will exercise their right to vote. People give reasons such as, but not limited to:

- 'I don't know about the issues.'
- 'I'm not registered.'
- 'I don't know the candidates.'
- 'I don't have time.'
- 'Does it really matter this year?'
- 'My vote doesn't make a difference.'
- 'I don't know where to vote.'
- 'It's Election Day?'

Come on, people. Not to be a political party pooper, but we've got to vote. It shouldn't be an afterthought. This sh*t matters!!! What goes on during these elections affects you, directly and indirectly. Your student loans, your legal status, your taxes, your benefits, that parking ticket you don't want to pay, your mom and dad's retirement status, EVERYTHING can be changed by voting. The thing that makes me upset about our country is how tenacious we are about politics in times of turmoil, yet how lackadaisical we are when it seems as if the dust has settled.

NEWSFLASH: We're still in a recession! Our country has no money and no jobs! Our environment is crumbling around us!

You can't complain about our country's issues if you don't vote... Point blank. Midterm elections are just important as presidential elections, in that you're picking the people who surround the President. You're voting for candidates in Congress that would support issues important to you and probably be able to further those initiatives. Why would you put a beautiful candle on a cake made of manure? Why would you want to start a job and not finish it? No, I'm not a certified political pundit, but I know for damn sure that there is worth in a vote. And by not voting, you might as well not have the right. So, please, do yourself and the country a favor and exercise your right. In this information age, it's pretty easy to figure out what a candidate's all about. Rather than visit MTO, take some time out to know the issues, find a polling place and just vote! Seriously. People died for universal suffrage in this nation. Don't die thinking your vote could have changed something. Just pull the lever and be on your way...

Dear GOP

via The New York Times:

The Obama administration said Monday that it would ask the lame-duck Congress next month to approve a $50 billion down payment on his long-range initiative to improve the nation’s roads, railways and air systems and to find savings to offset that cost, suggesting a new urgency to create jobs after last week’s disappointing unemployment report.

President Obama met at the White House with mayors, governors and current and former transportation secretaries of both parties to promote the infrastructure initiative, which he first proposed in September. Afterward, Ray LaHood, his transportation secretary and a former Republican congressman, told reporters that the lame-duck session would present an “upfront opportunity” to pass the $50 billion measure. Before then, however, the midterm elections on Nov. 2 are all but certain to expand the size of Mr. Obama’s Republican opposition for the new Congress that convenes in January. So Republicans returning later in November for unfinished business are likely to be in no mood to compromise with the White House when they will have the strength of greater numbers in the new year.

Approving $50 billion more for construction projects would be difficult enough, given that many Democrats have shied away from supporting more economic stimulus spending and that Republicans have convinced many voters that Mr. Obama’s initial two-year stimulus program, which included roughly $40 billion for transportation projects, failed to create jobs. But trying to agree on offsetting savings also would be contentious.

It's been said in numerous political arenas that the government is to do for the people what the people cannot do for themselves. Some take this to mean that the government should provide aspects of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness such as health care, education and protecting citizens. At the same time, oters feel that this tenet shouldn't include much at all. GOP, you're really taking this 'we hate big government' thing a little too far. President Obama introduced a $50 million bill that would jump-start initiatives to rebuild America's infrastructure, including its roads, railways and air systems. And you guys are doing what you've been doing for the past two years under Obama: say 'no'.

GOP, in what universe is improving a nation's infrastructure considered frivolous spending or too much interference from the government? I thought the government was supposed to regulate things of that nature and improve those systems when they begin to deteriorate. In terms of roads and railways, we're slowly falling behind other countries. In Japan and Europe, high-speed rails have all but replaced the Amtrak-style trains that have not only become ridiculously expensive, but also lag behind buses in efficiency. In terms of roads, every US city has thousands of miles upon miles of roads that are dilapidated and in desperate need of repair. Airline travel has become an inefficient luxury because of lack of regulation and airlines constantly folding. And you'd rather be a roadblock (no pun intended) to improving those systems for some vain reason, than just work to do... something with your power? Come on, son...

The thing is, these initiatives proposed by the Obama administration would cost us virtually nothing compared to the dearth of wealth we've just tossed away trying to 'rebuild' Afghanistan and Iraq. The transportation initiative is even going to create jobs, something that your policies have yet to do. Yet and still, you guys continue to say 'no'. Why? What is the point of saying 'no' for the sake of saying 'no'? Something as rudimentary as infrastructure-building shouldn't be a political divider, no matter how much contention or animosity there is between the parties. President Obama is trying to do an Eisenhower-esque overhaul of our outdated infrastructure. Are you really going to stand in the way of that, cutting corners for the sake of an outmoded platform? Midterms are probably going to shift the tides of Congress back your way. You've already fudged up the health care and stimulus bills. Don't stymie the arteries of our nation...

Donald Duck x Right Wing Media

I guess the economic times have gotten so tough that even the cartoons can't make a buck out here. This video is a remix of dozens of Donald Duck and Walt Disney cartoons from the 1930s to 1960s. Donald's life starts down a slippery slope because of the current economic crisis, when he loses his job and starts falling behind on his mortgage. Donald sees all of the things going wrong and hears a friendly voice in Glenn Beck, who inundates the Quackster with the holy gospel of conservative politics. Later, Donald has some second thoughts as he tries to keep up with a not-so-friendly Glenn Beck. The video is a perfect example of how even cartoons have a sliver of politics in them. Donald was having financial trouble way before the housing bubble. Word to @ButImDevinTho.

Dear Meg Whitman

The Kanye Shrug doesn't work all the time, Meg. We know what you did...

via ABCNews:

California gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman today found herself battling allegations that she knowingly employed an undocumented immigrant housekeeper, failed to pay a portion of her wages and then fired her in an act of political damage control. The charges come a little over a month before the November election.

At a news conference in Los Angeles on Wednesday organized by celebrity lawyer Gloria Allred, Whitman's former housekeeper and nanny, Nicky Diaz, tearfully recounted how in June 2009 she was suddenly terminated by Whitman and her husband, Griffith Harsh, after she said she asked the couple for legal help to obtain U.S. citizenship. Allred also alleged that Whitman became aware of Diaz's undocumented status years earlier, but took no action. Whitman said the "charges are without merit."

Diaz told reporters that just a few months before Whitman announced she was running for governor as a Republican, the former eBay CEO fired her after nine years spent cleaning the couple's 3,700-square-foot home in an upscale Northern California suburb and shuttling their children to and from school and appointments.

"From now on you don't know me and I don't know you," Diaz said Whitman told her in the summer of 2009. "I was shocked and hurt that Ms. Whitman would treat me this way after nine years. I realized at that moment that she didn't appreciate my work. I felt like she was throwing me away like a piece of garbage."

At the current juncture of politics in the United States, the word politician and hypocrite are damn near synonymous. Especially with the emergence of the Tea Party and the so-called 'bipartisan' nature that the government is trying to engender, it's obvious that not everyone can be on the right side at all times. When it comes to election time, there ends up being a mad rush to clean up whatever muck can be raked up against a particular politician, most of it going on behind closed door meetings at the expense of lobbyists and donated dollars. That said, what happens when the political damage control just so happens to coincide with an issue at the forefront of that particular candidate's jurisdiction? Such is your case, Meg Whitman. As you prepare for election day in California, it's obvious your stake in the illegal immigration issue was much deeper than you wanted it to be.

Meg, I won't mince words: Illegal immigrants are everywhere. You know it. I know it. The American people know it. Yet, the major contention against allowing these people amnesty and asylum is that their place in American is more deeply rooted than most would like to admit. Meg, you knowingly hired an illegal immigrant in Nicky Diaz and had her in your employ for well over 9 years. By most employment standards, that's grounds for the job security AND respect that such a tenure warrants. Think about it Meg. If you had been working at a law office for 9 years and they tried to cut YOU off and disavow all knowledge of your existence for superficial political purposes, how would you feel? My guess is you'd probably file suit, go to the media and make a huge deal about it, much like your former housekeeper is doing now.

See the thing is, Meg, as a Republican candidate, you're walking a thin line here. Do you continue the status quo of using your power to manipulate other lives as you see fit, or do you stand by your party's platform of 'kicking all of the wetbacks illegal immigrants out'? They say no slave can serve two masters. Well, no political candidate can stand by two contradictory doctrines, especially on such a polarizing issue. Why try and hide the obvious, Meg? The role of illegal immigrants is as cemented in this country as is apple pie and fried chicken. You've got 9 years of faithful service to prove that, and I'm sure half of your party and cabinet have just as much if not more. I shudder to think how long it would've taken for this to get out in the open had Ms. Diaz not opened her flap.

SIDENOTE: Since TMZ is the one who reported Ms. Diaz's gripes, albeit in a professional manner, can we finally admit that, while cutthroat in their research, blogs are a legitimate source of breaking news?

Look, Meg, it sucks that you were caught with your hand in the cookie jar that your party's been trying to put on the high shelf for years now. Don't try to deny it, now that your candidacy is at stake, and certainly don't do it as a last ditch effort to cover your party's ass. That, in and of itself, would be just as hypocritical...

Dear Glenn Beck

These are your people, Glenn... What exactly are they taking America back from again??

There are only a handful of people that I would actively wish physical harm on. Tom Brady and Comcast's CEO are two that I can think of offhand, but you, Mr. Beck have officially made the list of 'People I Want to See Literally Break a Leg'. Glenn, I really tried hard not to cast your name asunder, because, you try. You try to make your biting racist rhetoric as safe as possible. You try to keep your xenophobic undertones under wraps, by dubbing everything a fight for 'American values'. Hell, you even try to keep everything multicultural by having rallies on the same day as Martin Luther King Jr. I can understand why you want to play the middle ground. At the same time, I despise everything about you that I just stated.

Glenn, let's get straight to the point, because mincing words doesn't pay bills: You are underhandedly racist, conservatively short-sighted, and overzealous in your definition of 'American'. It seems like every time I hear your name in the media, it's not in relation to anything positive or uplifting. Your rally for 'Restoring Honor' was anything but honorable, regardless of how peaceful a picture you wanted to paint. If it isn't calling Obama out on his birthplace (for the 1000th time), it's promoting fear among an American people that are already confused as hell. You see, Glenn, you're the type of person who sees the idiocy going on in our country, and rather than inform the public, you use it to mold their opinions to your sick, twisted, white-picket fantasy of what you think America should be. What you fail to realize though, is that NO ONE IS INHERENTLY AMERICAN!! Don't you realize that this land was shanghai'ed from Native Americans, worked on the backs of slaves and immigrants and built to greatness by the descendants of people from all over the world? Even in your talks of 'returning America to God', you fail to realize that God doesn't see color. He doesn't see race, gender, ethnicity or country of origin. And he certainly doesn't see the size of your wallet or your socioeconomic bracket. I've always wondered where people like yourself found these doctrines. Are we reading the same Bible?

Glenn, its obvious you have more on your agenda than 'American values'. You're a Class-A fear-monger. You're fodder for the bass-ackwards inbred folk who still think it's 1896 and that Africa is devoid of light. You speak to the (non)sensibilities of White Americans who, for the first time in their lives, are realizing that they aren't the only ones who matter. It's hilarious how people act when they aren't as powerful anymore, especially you. You start acting as if your victims. Of what I have no clue, considering you (white male) have been the world's ruling class since people knew what skin color was. Glenn, take my advice. Stop believing that America is the land of opportunity for only your kind. Not only will that mode of thinking hold back the country, it will probably wipe you and your kind out before you think. Hate written in pretty, rosy letters is still hate. You should know that better than anyone, but hey what do I know. 'Restoring honor' apparently has a race qualification, so I might have to just sit this one out....

Dear Warmongers

via Newser:

A $40 million prison sits in the desert north of Baghdad, empty. A $165 million children's hospital goes unused in the south. A $100 million waste water treatment system in Fallujah has cost three times more than projected, yet sewage still runs through the streets

As the U.S. draws down in Iraq, it is leaving behind hundreds of abandoned or incomplete projects. More than $5 billion in American taxpayer funds has been wasted _ more than 10 percent of the some $50 billion the U.S. has spent on reconstruction in Iraq, according to audits from a U.S. watchdog agency.

That amount is likely an underestimate, based on an analysis of more than 300 reports by auditors with the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction. And it does not take into account security costs, which have run almost 17 percent for some projects.

It's one thing to propose a controversial plan, have the plan not work, and then admit that the plan was a failure and did more collateral damage than you though. It's a completely different thing to propose a controversial plan, have it fail, then deny the problem and try to keep going the same way. Therein lies your plight, oh ye in support of the military proceedings in Iraq and Afghanistan. Now that the last of the troops are being withdrawn from Iraq, it is quite evident that a hell of a lot of money has been wasted since we started this war, and that most of it has gone into structures with no infrastructure behind them. In war you guys decided rather than focus on combat, to build hospitals, schools and public works projects. Over $5 billion worth of materials, manpower and planning went into projects that weren't even finished.

My real problem with this egregious waste is that the same people who were clamoring for war and revenge on terrorism (how can you plot revenge on an idea?) are the same people getting salty at the government for too much spending. Hey idiots, the last time I checked our country still has some serious infrastructure and administrative problems too. Not to mention, we're STILL up to our nostrils in debt from a financial collapse that your irresponsible war spending caused. Warmongers, you can't have it both ways. You can't waste our money abroad on a war that really had no point and then get mad that we're in a huge recession. And that's especially when you guys want to curb spending on the homefront. So you can do what? Start another war? Look, the whole 'war driving the economy' got played out after World War II and after we started outsourcing all of our industries. So if it's not driving our economy, but in fact sucking money out of our wallets, with few if any viable victories, why are we still at war? I'm not saying that the initiatives in place were bad ideas. I just think that for all of the hoopla about the war, there's finally substantive proof that the US initiative in Iraq was more or less the military running around the desert with their thumbs up their butts. Warmongers, it's not enough to have a good idea for something. You've got to be able to see it through, while being efficient and realistic. You can't half-ass something and be content with the drastic losses you incur simply because you don't want to be wrong. That's flawed reasoning at it's core. I'm not sure most of you will even have the wherewithal to see this report and realize your folly. Then again, most of you don't see a lot of stuff coming. *starts building nuclear fallout shelter for imminent war with China*

Dear Republican National Committee

Well, I guess you can cross at least one of the ones on the left off...

via Politico:

The Republican National Committee has just over $5 million in the bank for the final stretch of the 2010 midterm election campaign, according to an unannounced filing with the FEC disclosed Friday night.

The report also indicates that the national party headed by embattled chairman Michael Steele is carrying just over $2 million in debt.

There was no press release from the RNC attempting to put a positive spin on the grim numbers. Rather, officials from the Democratic National Committee flagged the RNC's report, which was posted on the Federal Election Commission’s website Friday night.

It indicated that the committee brought in slightly more than $5.5 million in July — less than half of what the DNC raised — while spending $11 million.

Wow, RNC... Just, wow. If you opened up your metaphorical wallet right now, what would come out? My guess is dust and a lot of receipts for humble pie. That's because you guys are broke. Point blank. As a party your net worth right now is just over $5 million. $5 million???? LeBron James and Kim Kardashian get paid more to tweet! 'The Situation' from Jersey Shore makes $5 million!! And you guys are saying your budget is so dry that you can't outbuy a steroid-pumped, fake-tanned reality star? C'Mon son. This is one of the many hypocrisies that plague the Republican party. You guys are so adamant about fiscal responsibility and cutting back spending, and keeping the government out of the economy. Yet, you can't even pay your own bills. How can the country trust a party that's less solvent than the country itself? How can you guys profess that the Dems are full of it economically, when they don't have to start rock on the corner to fund mid-term elections.

It's even funnier, because your party has been gaining some steam, with all of the snafus that the Dems have been encountering. The Tea Party has a healthy following of idiots and Sarah Palin is using feminism to tout her own brand of stupidity to a loyal following. If you guys had half an idea about how to handle money, maybe you'd be able to capitalize. Not that I'm upset your party can't balance a checkbook, but it just goes to show you that those who constantly talk the talk most likely can't walk the walk. It just sucks you guys might have to go to CashForGold.com to pay for a midterm election period. That's sad. Imagine if you guys had this opportunity during a Presidential election and couldn't foot the bill. I think America would just be forced to pull the plug on you, GOP. Whatever the case, keep on tossing out drivel and expecting the rich to back you, when you guys are two late fees away from the poorhouse. I think some menial labor and accommodations are just what you need. Then we'll really see what you think about jobless benefits and financial overhaul...