Obama - the fiscally responsible president

There has been a lot of coverage lately on the Internet and in the news in general about statistics provided by the Office of Management and Budget, the Congressional Budget Office and Haver Analytics.  The data shows clearly that Barack Obama has been a fiscally responsible president.  The annualized growth of federal spending has been reduced to just 1.4% during the Obama Administration compared to 8.1% during Bush II's second administration. (click here) .

Needless to say, there has been a lot of push back from conservative bloggers and Republicans in general.  We all know that statistics can sometimes play with the truth.  If we want to prove something, just turn to statistics.  The funny thing here is that this information comes to us from non-partisan sources.  In reality, the slow pace of Federal spending is hurting economic recovery.  Paul Krugman has been a critic of Obama from time to time because of his fiscal restraint.  We all know that Congressional obstruction is behind the slow economy.  If you don't know that by now, you live in a bubble!

Barack Obama's plan to increase Federal revenues through a modest tax increase on the wealthiest Americans is a step towards fiscal sustainability.  Republicans are blind to the fact that government needs to pay for wars, fix infrastructure, protect our environment and improve the lives of everyone by raising revenue judiciously. Republicans and the wealthiest Americans used to be true patriots.  They are not anymore.  There seems to be no sense of responsibility to this country when it comes to paying for the freedoms we all enjoy.  I guess that includes the freedom to hide your money is Swiss bank accounts and accounts in the Cayman Islands-Mitt Romney.

As for those that feel violated by the facts displayed in this government report, I'm sure you will read your conservative blogs and find lying vindication.  I suggest however that you turn to the Politifact analysis of the debate where you will learn that Obama has slowed the growth of Federal spending more than any president in the past 60 years.  Politifact rates the Obama spending story as mostly true.

If you want your government to be fiscally responsible, the chart demonstrates the need to elect Democrats.

tomtoak

Does Mitt Romney have any core values?

We all need to be concerned about candidates that don't take the time to get facts right. What happens when the office holder is making decisions on bad information? Need I say Iraq! Take for instance last night's news where Mitt Romney claimed the shooter in Colorado got his weapons illegally.  Where is he getting his information from?  Maybe Sarah Palin's newspapers - oh; that's right, Sarah doesn't read newspapers.

Stories like this beg the question, does Willard Romney have any core values?  We all know that dogs don't like him.  I need to ask the following question; Which candidate in America has, during their political career, both supported and opposed abortion, "Don't ask don't tell",  assault weapons bans, LGBTQ equality, anti-tax pledges, stem cell research, campaign finance reform, raising the minimum wage, belief in global warming, limiting carbon emissions, Bush tax cuts, pathways to citizenship, capital gains tax, TARP bailouts, automotive company bailouts and the list goes on and on?  There is only one candidate to fit this description and that is Mitt Romney.

It seems to me that Mitt just can't settle on a political philosophy and is willing to say just about anything at any time.  Above all, our President needs to be a leader. An individual that seems to lack a set of core values should not be seeking the highest office in the land.  I respect politicians that can take guidance and change their mind from time to time.  This trait is a good thing; however, in Romney's case it is clear that his mind changes with the political wind.  Sarah Palin may be out there, but there is no confusion about her political view. 

I don't think there is confusion over Barack Obama's political views.  While I want him to step up to the plate at times, it is clear that he believes in a prudent approach to governing.  Why fight the fight when the votes are missing in Congress? 

I measure people by the strength in their beliefs.  I like both Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals.  I would not have a clue how to carry on a conversation with Mitt Romney and I'm confident that voters are shaking their heads too.

tomtoak

Donald Carcieri and his Tax on us all!!!!!

Sitting on the deck of a popular East Greenwich restaurant with East Greenwich Bay in the background, I look out over a "sea" of recreational boats. The toys of the rich. Our proud Governor smiles at the thought that these great folks deserve no taxes, sales tax or excise tax, on these "very necessary" cornerstones of our society. I don't fault the wealthy for playing in Narragansett Bay, if I had the money, I would proudly own one of those 42 footers. Why in the world should taxes be excused on these toys when the middle class citizens in this state have to pay all applicable taxes on their camping vehicles. Is not camping a viable component of our economy?

I'm sick and tired of the Republican mantra - "fight for the rich". The rich are not paying their fair share in this country and I can't point to one f____g job created in this state with that strategy. Somebody please explain to me why the Rhode Island budget grew 9% last year ($7 billion to $7.8 billion) at a time when our state is bleeding? Please explain to me how this can be when the state has eliminated 3000 workers, slashed pensions, and furloughed remaining state workers? Please explain to me why aid to cities and towns have been cut by millions of dollars when the budget for the state has grown by 9%? Please explain to me why the wealthiest among us are seeing their taxes slashed yet again; when the last time Carcieri did it, our unemployment rate continued to spiral out of control? Please explain to me why anyone buys the argument that the only way to job growth is to cut taxes on the wealthy? Somebody please explain to me why Donald Carcieri is still governor? Also, somebody explain to me why the conservative "nut job" radio commentators support this idiot and his idiotic financial policies?

Most of all; somebody explain to me why middle class, well meaning citizens don't get it? Why are so many supportive of such destructive fiscal policy? Can't the middle class draw the obvious conclusion when they see their vehicle excise taxes skyrocket across the state?

Four more months of this tragedy of leadership in our state; and as he's going out the door, he's giving away another sweet heart deal to a political pal, Curt Schilling. That's a $75 million dollar sweet heart deal that won't change a thing.

I have answers to all of the questions I posed; however, I think asking the questions is more important. If people of Rhode Island want some thought put into how this government is run, they need to vote for a person who thinks with his brain and not his bank account! Linc Chafee is the candidate of choice from my perspective. He has not been afraid to call outrageous public policy, "outrageous". Donald Carcieri and the Republican philosophy in this nation is outrageous.

I think it is finally time for the "Big Audit"! Rhode Islanders will know what I'm talking about.

tomtoak

Seething over health care!

Seething over health care is an understatement. Seething over folks that choose to believe the bull shit without seriously visiting the debate has become an unfortunate passion. Nobody speaks for the stupid better than Sarah Palin.

Have you notice that most of the folks screaming over health care are medicare recipients? They have their health care (flawed though it might be) and they would want to deny their grandchildren appropriate care. Health care scare mongers are the very people that insist we can't afford government sponsored care because it will bankrupt future generations. Notice to all irrational people out there; health care is bankrupting all of us, and it's not the government's fault.

The Providence Journal (Tuesday, August 4, 2009) had an excellent lead editorial calling for "Health care today". In that editorial, it was pointed out that the U.S. ranks 37th in the world by the World Health Organization for public health. Consider this fact; Medicare overhead is about 3 percent compared with for-profit companies that exceed 20 percent.

On a more personal note, I have knowledge of many friends and relatives that have needed the support of government to ensure quality health care. This country seems to have a great safety net, but what about those folks that I happen to know that have been working hard, can't catch any safety net and can't afford insurance. The nay Sayers see abuse in the system from people that are not doing their fair share; and, they have a point. Why can't everyone agree that people that are contributing and working hard should have a level of health care protection. This is the fundamental issue; not Sarah Palin's imagined "death panel"!

I have many friends and relatives that have joined the debate and the arguments in many cases are irrational. The arguments being used by the right-wing in this country are distortions at best, but they would best be described as deception, lies, fabrications, falsehoods and idiocy. Everyone in the U.S. should be protected by a level of health care - end of discussion.
How you get there needs to be rigorously debated but not postponed. Health care for Americans has been debated since Teddy Roosevelt's Bull Moose Party. Teddy was a good Republican and he got things right!

I am tired of listening to complaints about the health care in Canada and the waiting periods for elective surgery. Everyone goes to that argument without knowing any Canadians. Guess what? I know a lot of Canadians and they are very pleased with their health care. My own father, an American citizen and World War II vet was denied a much needed appointment at Lahey Clinic in Massachusetts when he was complaining of chest discomfort. Lahey Clinic offered an appointment, but he would have to wait months. My family happened to be friends with a cardiologist that set up an appointment for him immediately. Within the week my Dad had a 5 - way bypass surgery which improved his quality of life for his last 15 years. Don't ever tell me that Americans don't have to wait for health care!!!! That's a total lie. The for-profit consolidation of hospitals and doctors have driven up the cost of health care and have restricted access throughout this country.

We need change and we need it today! I'm seething over health care because I have experienced nightmares right here in the good ole U.S. of A.

tomtoak

Republican Radio Making Noise

You have to read today's front page story of the Providence Pamphlet (Providence Journal) regarding the feud at Rhode Island's premier radio talk station, WPRO (click here). It seems like even neo-conservative talk show folks just can't get along with each other, let alone define a vision for fixing things in this country.

If you read between the lines it is clear that John DePetro is not a team player. He's lucky he only got hit with a piece of paper in the eye. His little tantrum because Buddy Cianci asked one of his guests (Bruce Sundlun) to stay for his show (the show that followed) is truly "school yard". Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to ...... act like A-holes! Let's face it, the line up on WPRO is disturbingly full of hatred, bigotry, arrogance and ignorance. The only host that shows some level of normalcy is Buddy, but even he falters frequently.

Republican radio seems to be obsessed with making the news instead of talking about the news. When they talk about the news, they use no basis in fact a high percentage of the time and consequently, generate the controversy that they all crave. They are all looking for the headline and are jealous when somebody else steals their thunder. In the end though, its the lies that we are all left to ponder. Rush Limbaugh is the "biggest" example of the need to make the headlines. He will say anything to make the nightly news cycle and it is mostly lies and hatred that he continues to foster.

Additionally, the problem with radio talk is the current culture centered on Republican philosophy that has failed us miserably. OK, it is Republican radio after all so one would expect radio hosts to sing the Republican song. We hear radio hosts repeatedly beat listeners over the head with the "Obama deficits" that will cripple us for years to come. I agree with the need to solve deficits, but get your facts straight! Bush era practices have lead to the lion share of future deficits. If you don't believe me; click here.

Many Republicans are highly critical of Keith Olbermann because of his reporting the liberal side of the news. I can understand that. His special commentaries can be extremely hard hitting and rude. If you have never watched his show on MSNBC, you should. Keith does something that conservative pundits never seem to do. Keith always backs up his sentiments with a stream of facts that can make your head spin. He especially loves to turn things around on Republicans when they make some off-handed stupid comment for political posturing. Just yesterday, Newt Gingrich made the comment that he is not a "citizen of the world" like Obama, he's a "citizen of the United States". Keith shows up with a tape of Ronald Reagan saying; "I am a citizen of the world" and all of a sudden, Gingrich looks like a fool.

From Limbaugh to WPRO right here in little Rhode Island, Republican radio needs to be reformed. If the FCC won't do it, then I think progressive citizens need to start seeking out new ways to change the dialogue. We need to start complaining to the sponsors of what has now become a joke in America.

I have one suggestion for WPRO. Try firing DiPetro; hell, he's been fired many times before for his bigotry. Then install Tara Granahan in his morning post. When she filled in for him last Friday, I heard her handle some of John DiPetro's usual crowd. She stood up to them with style and grace. Unfortunately, Republican radio is not looking for style and grace; they are looking for headlines.

tomtoak

Why do I listen to Republican Radio?

I wish I could find an answer to the question I pose. Why the hell listen to talk radio when 95% of what you here is neo-conservative babble from mental midgets. Most of the time I try to crank up a little Neil Young or David Crosby when driving around town. On occasion, like today, my curiosity takes over and I succumb to the temptation to listen to fools.

President Obama's trip abroad to Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Germany and France peaked my interest in what "the dark side" is saying. Except for one exceptional caller, what I heard was hatred, lies and ignorance. One caller this morning on Rhode Island's WPRO moaned on about Obama's religion. He needed to say; "I told you so, I told you he was a Muslim". Here we go again; somebody needs to straighten the idiot out, but don't count on the talk show host to do it. Obama is Christian and has been attending Christian churches most of his adult life. We all knew that his father was Muslim (although he was a non-practicing Muslim).

Callers went on to insist; the media was not allowed to use Obama's middle name during the campaign and nobody dared say Hussein. Where the hell were you people? Were you all living under a rock? Republicans across this country used his middle name to make sure that voters would identify him as a Muslim. Obama wrote a book; "Dreams from My Father" that fully outlined his early life. The book was written before his vaulting onto the national political scene so it is clear that he was hiding nothing. Intelligent voters knew his story during the campaign while others kept trying to make things up. It feels good today to have intelligent voters in the majority from my perspective.

A couple of callers went on to blast NBC for the recent Brian Williams, 2 part story on the Obama White House. Callers insisted that this never happened with past presidents and again there was no correction from the talk show host. I remember seeing a story on the Bush White House on prime time TV during the early part of his administration. I think it's true that there is a different relationship between the Obama administration and the Bush administration when it comes to the national press corp. While it is clear that Obama respects the press, Bush was very negative towards the press.

The old saying that you "reap what you sow" seems appropriate here. Obama is obviously trying to sow the seeds for peace in the Middle East, while Bush was sowing poison ivy. While the jury is out on Obama's ability to change the dynamics in that part of the world, at least he is leading this nation towards a new positive image. Gunslinging Bush did not get Osama bin laden "dead or alive". Obama's reaching out while remaining firm has gained respect around the world.

I think many more problems are solved when people respect each other. The hatred displayed on Republican radio will never solve problems. While talk show host after talk show host allow the continual vitriol to be spewed at Barack Obama, respect becomes the casualty.

Yes; my respect for many Republicans has also become a casualty because of the continual non-sense, hatred, lies and ignorance that we hear on radio. I think the FCC needs to take a new look at the Fairness Doctrine. If that does not happen, maybe progressives could start an Internet viral boycott of sponsors to these hateful, unbalanced Republican radio talk shows.

tomtoak

Who Should Republicans Listen to?

Just a few comments today on the Confusion (Republican) Party. Having been blown out of the water in the last 2 elections, what this nation does not need is to hear Dick Cheney mouth off. Personally, I think that Dick Cheney is not sound mentally. The more he spews, the stronger the Democrats get. While I am a Democrat, I still have a strong belief in the 2 party system. I want to see successful, competent Republicans; there are just so few of them.

The fight for the heart of the Republican Party is best viewed by contrasting the positions of 2 close family members to key Republican faces. Meghan McCain, daughter of John McCain and Liz Cheney, daughter of Dick Cheney have both been at work trying to capture and secure a direction for their party. If Republicans want a political future, they had better be listening to Meghan McCain.

Meghan has been out there, established her own blog and has been calling for Dick Cheney to just shut up. She has been very critical of the Republicans from the past administration like Cheney and Karl Rove, that dragged the party into the mud of history. The neo-conservative movement continues however, to appease the behavior of the Bush administration. Talking heads on the Fox Noise Channel continue to defend torture and the bankruptcy of American values foisted upon us through the leadership of George W. Bush. If Republicans want to become a political force again, they need to listen to Meghan McCain slamming Dick Cheney.

Now if the Republicans want to be the party of "nothing", then they need to keep listening to Dick Cheney and his wayward child, Liz Cheney. This women is hell bent on defending her morally bankrupt father; the man that is close to holding the world record for draft deferments (5). Cheney's approval rating when he left office was 13%. Why the hell would any sane person be defending him at this time? He did not keep us safe; remember 911, and his policies have caused the exponential growth in terrorist movements throughout the world. Makes one wonder; is Cheney a terrorist?

Ed Shultz, on MSNBC, did a great segment on Dick Cheney yesterday. It seems clear to anyone watching that Dick Cheney actually wants this country to be hit again. Why do you think he is still out there fear-mongering? He wants the country to be hit so he can say, "I told you so." How scary is that? A former Vice President of this great country that took away some of our freedoms, that dismantled our long-held American values, that approved and promoted torture, that refuses to testify under oath, that shot a lawyer in the face and that wants this country to be hit again by terrorists; still can't keep his mouth shut.

Mr. Cheney; I think Eric Holder needs to read you your rights; "everything that you say can and will be used against you in a court of law". I suppose everyone in this country is innocent until proven guilty and that includes you; Mr. Vice President. Without question, an investigation needs to go forward and criminal decisions from your administration should be prosecuted. Dick Cheney and Liz Cheney; you both need to take a clue from George W. Bush, shut up for the good of the nation and your Republican Party.

Maybe that's what your doing - preparing an insanity defense?

tomtoak

Mouth Pieces, Blue Jeans, Arrogance and George Will

If you haven't heard by now, Mr. Mouthpiece himself, George Will, wrote a column for the Chicago Tribune last Friday, April 17, entitled; "You look absolutely ridiculous in jeans." Mr. Arrogance; we could never take you too seriously on any issue, but now you have gone too far. While the article largely paraphrases author, Daniel Akst, Will makes it clear he supports every word.

How about this line from Will's article; "Jeans come prewashed and acid-treated to make them look like what they are not - authentic work clothes for sons of toil and soil." Will, later confesses that he does own a single pair of jeans that he wore once. He needed a pair to attend a birthday party for the former U.S. Senator, John Danforth's 70th birthday (jeans were required dress). Let's put these two statements together and you can understand that the privileged Mr. Will, never did a day's work in his entire life. I can see him trimming his hedges now in a zoot suit. Oh; but that's right Mr. Will, that's manual labor and that's for other folks to do.

George Will; you pompous stuffed shirt!! You have just insulted every working American and you're too stupid to understand that conservative, working class people just lost a lot of respect for you. As for me; a left of center liberal, I lost respect for you a long time ago. You have just strengthened my case in the debating circle of my friends.

Will, further insults with the following; "Denim is the carefully calculated costume of people eager to communicate indifference to appearances." Let me tell you something, Mr. Will; I live in denim and I'll be buried in denim. Yes, I wore a suit when I had to testify before the legislature, or meet Congressional representatives or give talks to various interest groups. Most of my days as a forester were spent in blue jeans as I needed to connect to the people I was serving.

You have never experienced the smell of a logger coming through your door wearing denim; have you Mr. Will? It's really a manly smell of chain saw and sawdust; something that you will never know anything about. You can always tell what the logger was harvesting, pine or oak, as the smell is easy to differentiate if you've worked in the woods. You can't get respect from the men and women of "toil and soil" if you dress like "Fred Astaire" all of the time. You will never have the experience of enjoying the odors emanating from yourself and your work crew, both men and women, returning from a forest fire smelling of ash, smoke and sweat! You will never enjoy the same sense of accomplishment or struggle with the aches and pains at the end of the day.

What does one of my favorite authors have to say about all of this? Here's a little Henry David Thoreau thrown right back at you; "Kings and queens who wear a suit but once, though made by some tailor or dressmaker to their majesties, cannot know the comfort of wearing a suit that fits. They are no better than wooden horses to hang the clean clothes on." Thoreau continues; "No man ever stood the lower in my estimation for having a patch in his clothes; yet I am sure that there is greater anxiety, commonly, to have fashionable, or at least clean and unpatched clothes, than to have a sound conscience." Wear your zoot suits all you want, Mr. Will; I prefer to carry with me a "sound conscience".

You wonder why as life goes on, certain literature sticks with you? I have been stuck on Thoreau since my days of fishing on Walden Pond. One day while in the middle of the pond with a friend, a thunder storm seemed to come out of nowhere and the wind became so fierce, it drove us to shore. A lightning strike split a tree before our eyes and we escaped without injury. Thoreau was with me then and he's with me now. I'm sure I was dressed in jeans on that day. Reading Will's column brought me right back to Walden Pond and the wisdom of true men and women. By the way George, I like women in jeans! I'll leave you with this to chew on, Mr. Will!

"We don garment after garment, as if we grew like exogenous plants by addition without. Our outside and often thin and fanciful clothes are our epidermis or false skin, which partakes not of our life, and may be stripped off here and there without fatal injury; our thicker garments, constantly worn, are our cellular integument, or cortex; but our shirts are our liber or true bark, which cannot be removed without girdling and so destroying the man." (Henry David Thoreau, Walden)

tomtoak

Why are Some Conservatives Infatuated with Sarah Palin?

I can't understand for the life of me why some conservatives are so impressed by Sarah Palin? I've been reluctant to write about this topic because the troubling nature of the infatuation has made me search for a reason; obviously, I can't find one. I have very good friends that are truly conservative and only voted for McCain because of what they perceived Palin brought to the table. I know a number of other conservatives that were forced to vote for Obama because of their concern over Palin. One good friend from the south hadn't voted Democratic in over 50 years but told me, Palin is a real problem for McCain. It seems like Palin is truly a love-hate relationship with Republicans. I can't figure out the love part; and here's a few reasons why.

Didn't conservative folks notice that Palin pulled her kids out of school and dragged them all over the country with her during the election? I wonder what the law says about this in Alaska? Were her children actually truant? Barack and Michelle Obama made sure their kids stayed in school and sought as little disruption as possible to their children's routine. Heck; the Obama's made their children go to school the day after the election. Which is the "conservative" choice?

Sarah Palin charged the state for travel for her husband and kids on a regular basis. Forget about the national campaign, she did this all the time back in Alaska. Is this the practice of a fiscal conservative? Further, she was charging the state per Diem costs for those days that she was staying in her own home. OK, it was away from the Capitol, but you still have to wonder about her conservative credentials. This is not the practice of a true fiscal conservative.

When Sarah's star power was on the rise, we then learn of the clothing fiasco. The final chapter hasn't been written on this gem. Hundreds of thousands of dollars were spent from the Republican Campaign Committee for clothing, not only for herself, but for her kids. This ethical lapse is monumental. Meanwhile, Obama is walking around with holes in his shoes, a ten year old belt and I don't think he owned more than 4 suits when the campaign started. OK, he bought a few new suits and Michelle bought new clothes; but Michelle's dresses were reported to cost under $200 and, the Obama's paid for their own clothes. Who was making the fiscally conservative decisions here?

What about the myriad of ethics violations that Palin has brought upon the people of Alaska. It has been reported that her legal bills are approximately $500,000 to date. Troopergate was just one case in point. Here in Rhode Island we have a conservative governor that likes to defy the ethics code. He's been caught a number of times as has Palin. I'm not going to write this off as a conservative trait though. I think ethics violations extend beyond party lines. My point however; is that conservatives blast away at Democrats when there are ethics violations, yet apparently stay silent when it is one of them. Conservatives usually try to claim the higher ground even though they don't own it. Why do they want to own Palin's sketchy behavior?

Another troubling thing that I noted during the campaign was the forever presence of her husband. Doesn't this guy have a job? He should have been home in Alaska; taking care of the kids and the household, making sure those kids were doing their school work. It seemed like he was right there for every event and almost every interview. In the mean time, we know that one daughter had a little too much freedom. I ask you again; is this the behavior of a true conservative? Is this what conservative family values means?

Somebody help me! I remain very confused. Sarah Palin has not displayed stability throughout her life and stability is generally considered to be a conservative trait. A case in point; attending 5 different colleges over 6 years before she finally got a degree from the University of Idaho. How many people take that route to get their degree and why? There is still something that bothers me about Sarah Palin beyond all of this, I do not think that she is being honest at times.

For all the talk about Palin's family values; believe it or not, liberals have strong family values and most of us are fiscally conservative. To my friends that have trouble swallowing this, ask me how long the curtains were hanging in my state office? Palin has not exhibited conservative traits in her own life and if I'm looking for somebody with conservative values, Barack Obama wins that contest.

tomtoak

Why Are We Liberal or Conservative?

In an article published in the Boston Globe just before the election, November 2, 2008, authored by Eve LaPlante, it is reported that scientists are discovering our political leanings may be powerfully influenced by genetics. It was reported that: "...unconscious reaction to threat - how much we startle at frightening images and noise - determine our political views...". Kevin Smith, a University of Nebraska political scientist who co-authored the study which appeared in the "Journal of Science", states: "Political reactions are gut responses rather than rational weighing of pros and cons".

If this is true, it certainly explains a lot. You can never seem to debate somebody long enough to get them to change their mind. I guess my blog won't change any one's mind. That's OK though, progressive thinking people need ways to connect with their own ideas. They certainly can't go to radio talk shows in this state, all they'll find is aggravation. At least liberals now have an outlet on MSNBC at night.

How do I stack up in all of this? My Dad must have had conservative genes (he was from the South), - my Mom must have had liberal genes (she was from Boston). I'm not gun shy. I never startled when a gun is discharged even if I didn't expect it. I've been a hunter all of my life and I believe in gun rights. I guess I should be leaning conservative.

I can point to a moment in my life when my political leanings were cast forever. May 4, 1970 and the shootings at Kent State University. I supported John Kennedy as a kid, but heck, I was only 10. When the Vietnam war started to rage I was supportive of efforts to reign in the Communists. Then one day, something happened. I learned that our Country had been bombing Cambodia without Congressional knowledge - Richard Nixon had been hiding the truth.
I was embarrassed and I had many students telling me, "we told you so". You see, I was one of those students that stood up at campus workshops on Vietnam and spoke in favor of the Nixon Administration. At one point, I held up a copy of the "Communist's Daily Worker" newspaper (yes, you could find these on college campuses in 1970) and called pure propaganda its headline, "Nixon Bombs Cambodia". I told students that this is simply not true as the story would be in the Boston Globe; after all, we have a free press. Many months later, the country learned of Nixon's secret bombing campaign in a neutral country without Congressional knowledge.

I felt a seismic shift in my political thinking on May 4, 1970 and my political destiny was cast in stone. I quit ROTC at the end of the semester and still got my A. I had been lied to by my President and was made a fool for supporting him. That was it; I worked for George McGovern in 1972 and never looked back. I guess it took powerful images at a troubling time to make me a liberal. I don't think that genes played a role.

The bright side in of all of this is that if genes are involved, maybe somebody can develop a pill to cure the problem. My god, I hope liberals come up with the pill first!

Blog On

Neo-Conservatives Need an Education

Yesterday on MSNBC I heard Oklahoma senator Tom Coburn state the following in relation to the President's stimulus package: "A government job does not create economic wealth" Senator Coburn, you are either lying, mentally challenged, or just plain at the bottom of your class. Government has provided countless stepping stones for building personal wealth through the hard work of public employees.

Have you ever heard of NASA? Government scientists have not only provided products to the business world, they have continually fostered innovation in the private sector to meet their needs to continue our presence in space. Think about that the next time you use your microwave, computer, or blackberry. Senator Coburn, have you ever heard of the Internet, or as George Bush would put it "the Internets" (funny thing here, my spell check has red underlined Internets). Well, besides our safety and freedom, the Internet is the greatest gift to the American people and the world from our military. Yes, that's right, public employees at work creating the greatest engine of wealth in the history of mankind. Maybe you need to rethink this!

I'll go back a little further in time and talk about something that I am familiar with. Ever hear of the McSweeney-McNary Act of 1928. Go look it up. This act increased the Forest Service role in research. The U.S. Forest Products laboratory, built at an earlier time (1910) in Madison, Wisconsin, became the centerpiece of wood products research for this country. You should visit there someday. Ever hear of plywood, particle board, laminated beams, pressure treated lumber and on and on and on? That's right, public employees providing innovation to the private sector, thereby, generating wealth.

I'm confident that the state of Rhode Island is a slightly better place because of some of the work I did as a public employee. A number of non-profits now reside in the state through the work of state foresters in the region. Landowner taxes on forest lands have been brought into line, providing the opportunity for individuals to continue to own their land. Land trusts are now found in every community with the help in some instances of public employees. The logging community has been able to function through efforts to build Best Management Practices, and arborists have been trained and licensed. Senator Coburn, you are just wrong!

While I'm at it, I have one more bone to pick with Neo-cons. Senator John Thune from South Dakota really got on my nerves yesterday when he appeared on MSNBC. Would you all stop saying the "Democrat Party" Yes there are democrats, but when you refer to the party, it's the "Democratic Party". I tell this to all of my friends that are members of the "Republic Party".

Blog On