Republicans are killing democracy

OK: I admit, that is a pretty strong statement in the title of this post. With the recent Supreme Court decision that treats corporations as individuals, moneyed interests will buy the future and buy the votes. It is so hard for me to believe that 48% of Republicans are Republican. Walk into any trailer park and I'll bet you will find significant majorities voting Republican. Why? I understand the top 2% of the Republican party voting Republican, but don't tea party folks realize that the Republican leadership wants to strip them of social security and their medicare benefits.

For you middle class Republicans, you have to realize that it is the Democrats that have fought for better lives for all citizens. The private sector has some great people providing jobs throughout this country (people of both parties), but in the end, every American needs to be worried about their future. Social Security and Medicare are easily fixed by raising taxes only slightly on the rich in this nation. Hell - During the Eisenhower administration, citizens making over $1 million per year were taxed at a 91% rate. World War II had to be paid for. All Obama is asking is for the wealthiest in our society to pay 39% instead of 36% of income (Clinton level taxation). Bush pushed the tax cuts for the middle class and the rich but this long ugly experiment simply has failed. Government needs to raise revenue just like any business. Our wars need to be paid for and with the wealthiest calling the shots, they need to pony up.

I would ask Republicans to join "Patriotic Millionaires For Fiscal Strength" and I would also urge everyone to read "Bush era tax cuts the largest contributor to the public debt."

I could never be more eloquent on this issue than a former Supreme Court Justice:

"We can have democracy..... or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both". Justice Louis D. Brandeis

With the current Republican intransigence, I ask you; are Republicans killing democracy?

tomtoak

Kelo v. City of New London Revisited

Do you remember the landmark Supreme Court case of Kelo v. New London, Connecticut when the court ruled that lands taken by eminent domain could be transferred to other private concerns? In this case 7 homeowners had their property seized for commercial development. David Souter was the deciding vote in a 5-4 decision.

Well; after the court ruling and the destruction of all property, the land was cleared for the construction of a new Pfizer pharmaceutical plant. Yesterday the pharmaceutical giant backed out of the deal. New London is left holding a vacant lot without any consideration of the "public good". Truth be told, the confiscation of this land was never going to be in the public best interest. Contrary to popular belief, when commercial and industrial development occurs, the taxes of citizens in the community always goes up. While jobs may be good for some people, the benefit to the community as a whole is negative.

I think it unfortunate that the lawyers for the plaintiffs in this case did not have their hands on the tax study done by the Southern New England Forest Consortium, Inc. and the Trust for Public lands in Connecticut's case. Please view my April 15, 2009 post that graphically presents the case against the public good when commercial and industrial development occurs. That post was my tax day protest. The studies conducted clearly show that as the commercial and industrial taxable value increases in any community, the effective tax rates for residents always go up.

Yes, there may be good for some; however, the "public good" should be considered as this requires that everyone benefit. Private transfer of land to private concerns does not meet that simple litmus test. There is a clear and direct correlation between growing your commercial and industrial base and the subsequent increase in property taxes. Those unaffected by the development are damaged when their property tax increases. Taking lands by eminent domain requires that everyone benefit, not a corporate giant.

You may recall that there was a movement in New Hampshire to take away David Souter's cabin in the woods by eminent domain to build a rustic hotel and vacation destination. It's too bad that never happened. For those of you that believe that this is a liberal thing, think again. This action was taken because of corporate greed. I stand with the homeowners that had their life crushed by the hands of government and blame conservative thinking for this disaster of public policy. I sincerely hope that the landowners get their property back and succeed in pursuing further legal action against those involved. It's too bad you can't sue the Supreme Court. It's not often that such a bad decision becomes so painfully obvious so quickly. I hope there is a lesson in this for everyone. I was steaming when it happened and I'm still steaming over the injustice to the individuals in this case.

tomtoak

Wisdom from the Woods X

Wisdom from the Woods is an occasional column that outlines complex issues.


Today's picture is another view from the Holyoke Range in Western Massachusetts. It's in the woods where I think anyone can do their best thinking. Too bad Mark Sanford wasn't in the woods walking the Appalachian Trail as first reported, he could have really cleared his head if he had done that. He'll have a lot of opportunity to be walking the woods in the future though.

Today is kind of a special day as it marks my 100th post to this blog. I started the blog 141 days ago and I've thoroughly enjoyed sharing my thoughts. I am also pleased with the number of people that have been reading these pages and I'm most impressed by the average time readers are spending here (approximately 6 minutes per visit). At some point I will share with readers additional numbers, but I want to have more information because I have only been tracking the traffic for 2 months now.

Today I want to just say a few words about the most important complex issue of our times, nuclear proliferation. North Korea is really scaring me and because of their deteriorating economy, it won't be long before they make a move against the South. I hope that the Obama administration is making preparations for this disastrous possibility. This is another mess you have gotten us into, George Bush.

Why pick on Bush here when the upper Korean peninsula has been a problem since World War II? I'll pick on George because he accelerated the nuclear arms race throughout the world like no other peer. He started his 8 years after being selected as President by Sandra Day O'Connor by calling North Korea, Iraq and Iran; "the axis of evil". Bush then proceeds to launch a preemptive invasion of Iraq based upon a series of monumental falsehoods (lies if you will). Now ask yourself; if you've been labeled the "axis of evil" and the people doing the labeling invaded without cause one corner of the triangle, you sure as hell would be making preparations for protecting your country.

The problem Obama faces is the American political system itself. Even if Obama could wheel and deal with some of our adversaries, they know damn well that the next American leader could end up being another Bush (I'm choking here). Eight years is not a lot of time to deal with such a complex issue. Knowing that the United States never invaded a country with a nuclear deterrent is all the evidence any country would need to accelerate and build a nuclear arsenal. Given the messages sent by the Bush administration, is it any wonder that the world is now going to have to deal with 2 unfriendly nations that posses WMD?

This is not a pretty picture and I don't hazard a guess at the outcome. I do know this; George W. Bush was a disaster for the United States and the world. I wonder; if Sandra Day O'Connor had a second chance to pick a President, would she still choose the worst mistake in American history? Al Gore won the election by 500,000 votes and he won the state of Florida. One person (the deciding vote on the Supreme Court) is responsible for the current day nuclear proliferation and the economic morass that we are in. The Florida Supreme Court had it right with their unanimous vote (to count all of the votes). George W. Bush, the selected President lived up to his reputation of failing at everything he had his hands in.

Do you remember historically it was the American strategy to keep the Winchester rifle out of the hands of American Indian? We wanted that distinct firepower advantage over our perceived enemy. Certainly the American Indian knew that they were perceived as an enemy. Wanting weapons to even the fight is just human nature and many rifles were acquired by the native tribes. While the consequences of nuclear proliferation is far more dangerous, the human nature behind acquiring the weaponry remains the same.

Perhaps the Obama administration can change the tone by changing perceptions. It is my feeling that the possibility for success is extremely low. I don't think that perceptions will change fast enough to prevent these nations from building nuclear arsenals. Change in North Korea is especially problematic because that is truly a "closed" society. I hope I'm wrong!

George W. Bush; because of all your stupid bullying tactics, you have accelerated the potential growth of nuclear weapons in the hands of dangerous people. Your legacy can be summed up in one word; "failure" (during the Bush years if you googled; "failure", it would take you directly to the White House).

tomtoak

Washington D.C. after 911

I've just returned from a week in Washington D.C. where I went as a tourist for the third time in my life. I apologise to readers that have been looking for new posts during the past week, but my hotel did not have a public computer facility. So for the past week, I forgot what a computer felt like. Don't worry, I'm back and will be looking forward to offering more opinions on the issues of the day.

Last week's poll seemed to mirror the perceptions of the Congress and the public at large. The question; Do you support the appointment of Sonya Sotomayor to the Supreme Court had a 100% positive response, although 16% of respondents said "yes with reservations" The remaining 84% of respondents had no reservations.

I just want to say a few words about visiting the Nation's capitol as a tourist following the attacks on 911. While I've traveled to D.C. over 50 times in my life, I've only been the tourist on 3 occasions. I went when I was around 12 years of age with my parents, and then I took my son there along with my wife during the early part of the Clinton administration. Last week's visit saw many changes from the Clinton years.

Today, you need permission from someone in Congress to visit certain facilities such as the White House and Congress. Some 17 years ago, we toured the White house without a problem. Today, the selection process is kept secret as it probably should be. We applied 2 months before our visit and did not gain entry this time.

Every museum entry has tight security and the feeling of freedom that Americans enjoyed some 10 years ago seems to be somewhere in the distant past. I don't suppose that things will reverse themselves anytime soon. The most striking site was a guard standing outside of the Capitol with a long gun (probably and automatic weapon). It reminded me of my travel to Mexico many years ago on a business trip to Vera Cruz. Mexican Army guards seemed to be in a lot of places with their long weapons in hand. Somehow, we in America never thought this would be necessary.

Another familiar site was the presence of bomb sniffing dogs making their rounds through the park areas surrounding the Capitol and other key facilities. And of course, there are now barriers everywhere.

A lot has changed since 911. Most of this change is absolutely necessary. Spending an entire day in the U.S. Holocaust Museum 6 days after the attack there was a sobering experience. There was another striking fact however; tourism is alive and well in Washington D.C. The election of Barack Obama has been a real boon to the economy of this city. Threats aside, everyone still wanted to be there and enjoy what this Nation has given us. It was a great week.

I'm awfully glad that I had the opportunity to visit the city in a more innocent time. One thing that has not changed in the years I've been traveling to the city, the homeless are still everywhere, and that is a sad commentary on our society.

Check out the new slide show.

tomtoak